You are on page 1of 91

GRIESHABER, Ph.D.

, JOHN
6/27/2008

Page 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

IN RE: KATRINA CANAL BREACHES CIVIL ACTION


CONSOLIDATED LITIGATION NO. 05-4182 K2
JUDGE DUVAL
PERTAINS TO: MRGO AND ROBINSON
(No. 06-2268)

Rule 30(b)(6) deposition of THE UNITED


STATES OF AMERICA, BY AND THROUGH THE UNITED
STATES ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS' DESIGNEE JOHN
GRIESHABER, Ph.D., P.E., given at the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers New Orleans District
offices, 7400 Leake Avenue, New Orleans,
Louisiana 70118-3651, on June 27th, 2008.

REPORTED BY:
JOSEPH A. FAIRBANKS, JR., CCR, RPR
CERTIFIED COURT REPORTER #75005

Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285


GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 2 Page 4
1 APPEARANCES: 1 EXAMINATION INDEX
2 REPRESENTING THE PLAINTIFFS: 2
3 BRUNO & BRUNO 3 EXAMINATION BY: PAGE
4 (BY: JOSEPH M. BRUNO, ESQUIRE) 4
5 (BY: SCOTT JOANEN, ESQUIRE) 5 MR. BRUNO .................................6
6 (BY: FLORIAN BUCHLER, ESQUIRE) 6 EXHIBIT INDEX
7 855 Baronne Street 7
8 New Orleans, Louisiana 70113 8 EXHIBIT NO. PAGE
9 504-525-1335 9 Exhibit 1 ................................11
10 10 Exhibit 2 ................................11
11 REPRESENTING THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: 11 Exhibit 3 ................................11
12 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, 12 Exhibit 4 ................................47
13 TORTS BRANCH, CIVIL DIVISION 13 Exhibit 5 ................................94
14 (BY: RICHARD STONE, ESQUIRE) 14 Exhibit 6 ...............................109
15 (BY: DAN BAEZA, ESQUIRE) 15 Exhibit 7 ...............................110
16 P.O. Box 888 16 Exhibit 8 ...............................115
17 Benjamin Franklin Station 17 Exhibit 9 ...............................115
18 Washington, D.C. 20044 18 Exhibit 10 ...............................133
19 202-616-4289 19 Exhibit 11 ...............................148
20 20 Exhibit 12 ...............................151
21 21 Exhibit 13 ...............................197
22 22 Exhibit 14 ...............................198
23 23 Exhibit 15 ...............................218
24 24 Exhibit 17 ...............................234
25 25
Page 3 Page 5
1 REPRESENTING THE U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS. 1 STIPULATION
2 CORPS OF ENGINEERS, OFFICE OF COUNSEL 2 IT IS STIPULATED AND AGREED by and
3 (BY: JENNIFER LABOURDETTE, ESQUIRE) 3 among counsel for the parties hereto that the
4 7400 Leake Avenue 4 deposition of the aforementioned witness may be
5 New Orleans, Louisiana 70118-3651 5 taken for all purposes permitted within the
6 504-862-2843 6 Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, in accordance
7 7 with law, pursuant to notice;
8 ALSO PRESENT: 8 That all formalities, save reading
9 ROBERT FISHER, ESQ. 9 and signing of the original transcript by the
10 WILLIAM D. TREEBY, ESQ. 10 deponent, are hereby specifically waived;
11 CHARLES SUTTON, ESQ. 11 That all objections, save those as to
12 R. SCOTT HOGAN, ESQ. 12 the form of the question and the responsiveness
13 JOSEPH E. BEARDEN, III, ESQ. 13 of the answer, are reserved until such time as
14 CHRISTOPHER ALFIERI, ESQ. 14 this deposition, or any part thereof, is used
15 RICHARD PAVLICK, ESQ. 15 or sought to be used in evidence.
16 16
17 PRESENT VIA I-DEP: 17
18 ERIC GOLDBERG, ESQ. 18 * * *
19 RONALD KITTO, ESQ. 19
20 CHRISTOPHER ALFIERI, ESQ. 20
21 21
22 VIDEOGRAPHER: 22 JOSEPH A. FAIRBANKS, JR., CCR, RPR,
23 TODD MEAUX (DEPO-VUE) 23 Certified Court Reporter in and for the State
24 24 of Louisiana, officiated in administering the
25 25 oath to the witness.
2 (Pages 2 to 5)
Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285
GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 6 Page 8
1 MR. BRUNO: 1 will do what I can to rephrase the question so
2 This is a Notice of Deposition 2 that you and I can be on the same page.
3 taken pursuant to Rule 30(b)(6) of the 3 A. I understand.
4 Federal Rules. 4 Q. There it is.
5 Counsel, would you be so kind as 5 All right. When is the first time
6 to identify the person who the 6 that you were made aware that the government
7 government has appointed today to 7 was going to appoint you to represent it in the
8 appear in response to this notice and 8 context of this deposition?
9 the particular paragraphs to which he 9 A. I guess about two weeks ago.
10 will be speaking? 10 Q. Okay. How many times did you meet
11 MR. STONE: 11 with counsel for the government in preparation
12 It's Mr. John Grieshaber, 12 for the deposition?
13 G-R-I-E-S-H-A-B-E-R. And the topics 13 A. Twice.
14 are 27, 28, 31, 34 to 37. 14 Q. Okay. And for how long did you meet
15 MR. BRUNO: 15 with them on each of those occasions?
16 Great. Thank you. 16 A. I guess a half hour the first time,
17 With that, would you swear the 17 two plus hours the second time.
18 witness? 18 Q. Okay. Now, do you know how it was
19 JOHN GRIESHABER, PH.D., P.E. 19 that you were selected to speak on behalf of
20 USACE HPO, NOD, 7400 Leake Avenue, New Orleans, 20 the government for the particular paragraphs?
21 Louisiana 70118, a witness named in the above 21 A. Um -- I really don't know the definite
22 stipulation, having been first duly sworn, was 22 way it happened. I just was told it was
23 examined and testified on his oath as follows: 23 happening.
24 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 24 Q. It's you.
25 Q. Good morning, sir. My name is Joseph 25 A. Got it.
Page 7 Page 9
1 Bruno. 1 Q. All right. That's fine.
2 First, have you ever given a 2 Did you review any documents in
3 deposition before? 3 preparation for this deposition?
4 A. Yes, I have. 4 A. I was shown some documents, and I went
5 Q. So you're you generally know the rules 5 and reviewed the page in the DM, the P&S that
6 of the game. 6 showed the pile lengths, tip elevations and top
7 A. (Nods affirmatively.) 7 of wall.
8 Q. Let me just share with you just once 8 Q. Okay. Let me get you to explain for
9 again what you may encounter this morning. 9 the record, DM means?
10 From time to time counsel for the government 10 A. That's a design manual. The, um --
11 may object, which is their right; however, we 11 the P&S are the plans by which the wall was
12 are reserving a ruling on the objection until 12 built.
13 the deposition is sought to be used at trial. 13 Q. All right. The wall is which wall?
14 So unless your counsel instructs you not to 14 A. Is the wall -- the IHNC floodwall that
15 answer, you should answer the question. Okay? 15 we're speaking of.
16 Is that fair? 16 Q. Okay.
17 A. I understand. 17 MR. BRUNO:
18 Q. All right. As between you and I, my 18 Richard, can you just give me the
19 rules are real simple. You're the boss of 19 Bates number on that?
20 breaks. If you need to get a cup of coffee or 20 MR. STONE:
21 you need a personal break, you just hold up 21 I don't have a Bates number.
22 your hand, we'll stop immediately. Okay? 22 MR. BRUNO:
23 With regard to my questions, if you 23 Why don't we just produce it,
24 don't understand them or they don't make any 24 then, if you don't mind.
25 sense to you, just holler, just tell me, and I 25 MR. STONE:
3 (Pages 6 to 9)
Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285
GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 10 Page 12
1 We will produce it if you ask for 1 at I thought we had an understanding
2 it. 2 that documents that were used we were
3 MR. BRUNO: 3 going to get documents.
4 I'm trying to make it easier on 4 MR. BRUNO:
5 both of us. 5 No, we don't have an
6 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 6 understanding, particularly with you.
7 Q. Is there more than one design 7 MR. TREEBY:
8 memorandum? I'm trying to recall. I think 8 I provide documents at every --
9 there were some amendments over time. 9 MR. BRUNO:
10 A. I really don't know. 10 I know that.
11 Q. Do you recall the year of this 11 MR. TREEBY:
12 particular document? Since you're looking at 12 To you.
13 it -- 13 MR. BRUNO:
14 MR. STONE: 14 I know.
15 If you have it there with you, 15 MR. TREEBY:
16 share it with him, it's okay. It's 16 So you're not going to provide
17 not a problem. 17 them the other way?
18 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 18 MR. BRUNO:
19 Q. All right. 19 Bill, the witness showed up with
20 A. I'm looking for a date on it. I think 20 one copy of the document.
21 I was like 1969, but -- 21 Do you want to stop the
22 Q. All right. Is that your only copy? 22 deposition to get copies? I just
23 A. Yeah. But I'm sure that wherever I 23 don't want it to count against my
24 got it from we can get another one. 24 time.
25 MR. BRUNO: 25 MR. TREEBY:
Page 11 Page 13
1 Do you mind if I mark it, 1 I don't know about your time --
2 Richard? 2 MR. BRUNO:
3 MR. STONE: 3 I know about my time.
4 No. Go right ahead. 4 MR. TREEBY:
5 MR. BRUNO: 5 The problem exists --
6 By the way, I've marked for the 6 MR. BRUNO:
7 record already the Notice of 7 Bill, the witness just gave me
8 Deposition, I've marked that as 8 this piece of paper. He doesn't have
9 Number 1. 9 copies. Do you want copies, yes or
10 (Exhibit 1 was marked for 10 no? Make it simple
11 identification and is attached hereto.) 11 MR. TREEBY:
12 MR. BRUNO: 12 Yes.
13 Counsel has been kind enough to 13 MR. BRUNO:
14 provide me with a biography which I've 14 Yes. Let's stop the deposition.
15 marked as Number 2. 15 Would you make some copies for
16 (Exhibit 2 was marked for 16 Mr. Treeby.
17 identification and is attached hereto.) 17 (Off the record.)
18 MR. BRUNO: 18 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
19 And I'm going to mark this piece 19 Q. All right. Now, you previously
20 of paper as Number 3. 20 indicated on the record that this document
21 (Exhibit 3 was marked for 21 which we've marked as Plaintiff 3 was provided
22 identification and is attached hereto.) 22 to you by counsel for the government?
23 MR. TREEBY: 23 A. No.
24 Is it possible -- I mean, this 24 Q. I'm sorry.
25 has been -- the depositions I've been 25 A. It was provided by someone in
4 (Pages 10 to 13)
Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285
GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 14 Page 16
1 structures branch in engineering division. 1 east bank of the IHNC as the north and south
2 Q. All right. It doesn't have a Bates -- 2 breach. But for the record, this is the breach
3 MR. STONE: 3 that's closer to --
4 I won't let you inquire into 4 A. The Claiborne bridge.
5 anything that I've provided him as 5 Q. Okay. Now, this is what's commonly
6 counsel. That's attorney/client 6 referred to as an as-built drawing, right?
7 privilege and work product. 7 A. I do not -- I don't know. I just
8 MR. BRUNO: 8 asked structures to give me a cross-section,
9 Well, we'll deal with that with 9 and that's what I got.
10 the judge. 10 Q. Okay. When you maintain files of what
11 MR. STONE: 11 the Corps has built, you keep in your file a
12 We certainly will. 12 plan which describes what was actually built in
13 MR. BRUNO: 13 the field, right?
14 That's fine. It doesn't have a 14 A. Correct.
15 Bates number on it, so -- you think 15 Q. All right. Are you familiar with the
16 it's necessary for us to figure out 16 term as-built drawings?
17 this Bates number or you just want to 17 A. Yes, I am.
18 go with this? 18 Q. Okay. On this document, it says, as
19 MR. STONE: 19 constructed. Can I conclude that this is an
20 It's in our Rule 26 -- 20 as-built drawing?
21 MR. BRUNO: 21 A. I would assume so.
22 I know it is. 22 Q. All right. You are certainly relying
23 MR. STONE: 23 on this document to reflect, for your
24 -- and we can get you a Bates 24 appearance today, the sheet pipe tip; right?
25 number if we need it. Let's go with 25 A. That's correct.
Page 15 Page 17
1 it like it is. Let witness identify 1 Q. All right. Now would you kindly show
2 it. 2 me where on the document one might look in
3 MR. BRUNO: 3 order to ascertain what the depth is of the
4 We'll go with it like it is. I 4 sheet pile tip in that wall?
5 will, Richard. I still want to get a 5 A. You would look at the section, go to
6 Bates number for it. It will take us 6 the bottom, it will give the tip elevation. It
7 hours and hours and hours to figure 7 says, existing sheet pile, and it gives you the
8 out the Bates number. Do you think -- 8 tip elevation.
9 MR. STONE: 9 Q. All right. And I see you've
10 We'll help you with that. 10 highlighted it in yellow, and it says elevation
11 MR. BRUNO: 11 -8.0?
12 Thanks. I appreciate that. 12 A. Correct.
13 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 13 Q. Do you know what datum is being
14 Q. All right. Now, what is this 14 referenced by the elevation -8.0, plus or
15 document, Mr. Grieshaber? 15 minus?
16 A. That is a document that shows a 16 A. I don't know.
17 cross-section of the wall in the vicinity of 17 Q. All right. Now, do you know whether
18 the failures. 18 or not this drawing which you've told me is
19 Q. All right. In the vicinity of one or 19 near the south break reflects the sheet pile
20 both? 20 depth for the entire length of that floodwall
21 A. Um -- I will have to look and see. 21 from the -- I forget, what's the bridge? The
22 Q. Sure. (Tendering.) 22 Florida bridge?
23 A. I think it's just the south failure. 23 A. Florida Avenue is the bridge --
24 Q. Okay. And for the record, we have 24 Q. Florida is on the north?
25 been, I think, referring to the breaches on the 25 A. Yes.
5 (Pages 14 to 17)
Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285
GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 18 Page 20
1 Q. And Claiborne to the south? 1 Mr. Grieshaber, do you know what the sheet pile
2 A. I do not know that for a fact. 2 tip elevation is? Or was, I should say. It's
3 Q. Okay. All right. 3 not there anymore.
4 MR. STONE: 4 A. I would have to see a set of plans. I
5 Before you go any further, Joe, 5 don't know it off the top of my head.
6 Item Number 27 asks for us to present 6 Q. All right. But do you know -- how
7 a witness who can speak to all plans, 7 does one reference these plans to a particular
8 specifications, surveys, et cetera, 8 location along the length of this wall between
9 that you have there. We assumed that 9 Florida Avenue and South Claiborne Avenue?
10 you would pull plans and surveys that 10 A. It would be by station numbers.
11 you wanted to specifically ask about. 11 Q. Okay. All right. Do you know what
12 So if you have any for any of this, 12 the station numbers are that are applicable to
13 um -- 13 this length of wall?
14 MR. BRUNO: 14 A. Not off the top of my head.
15 Well, I don't know that I need to 15 Q. Okay. Does the document Plaintiffs'
16 pull anything. The witness is 16 Exhibit 3 at least give you some reference to
17 supposed to be knowledgeable about the 17 some of the stations?
18 subject, and I'm presuming that 18 A. Yes, it does. It gives station
19 knowledge. 19 numbers.
20 MR. STONE: 20 Q. What station numbers do you see there?
21 Well, he's going to cover this 21 A. 30+00 coming off of Drawing 6 to --
22 topic. 22 Q. I'm sorry. 30+ --
23 MR. BRUNO: 23 A. 00, going to 36+50, it looks like.
24 Well, this topic, do you agree 24 Q. All right.
25 with me, covers all plans, 25 A. It might be 90. It's hard to read on
Page 19 Page 21
1 specifications, surveys, and/or 1 this drawing.
2 reports identifying the sheet pile 2 Q. Okay. Am I correct that you're
3 depth of the East Bank Industrial Area 3 reading from what's indicated here as the match
4 flood protection system? 4 line 30+00, and it says drawing -- I guess that
5 MR. STONE: 5 says Drawing 6, I'm not sure. That makes
6 Yes, if you have a plan you want 6 sense. And in the bottom here, it says, match
7 to ask him about -- 7 line 36+90, Drawing Number 8.
8 MR. BRUNO: 8 A. Correct.
9 I thought I was. I was asking 9 Q. Okay. So this must be Drawing
10 him those questions, and he told me he 10 Number 7.
11 didn't know. 11 A. Correct.
12 MR. STONE: 12 Q. Got you. Now, if you go on Page 2, it
13 I'm trying not to interfere here. 13 refers to 0+67S to 0+00S. Can you tell me what
14 MR. BRUNO: 14 that reference is?
15 I understand that. I want to 15 A. This says this is the wall section
16 make it clear for the record, I am 16 between those stations.
17 asking questions about the sheet pile 17 Q. Can you please tell me how those
18 depth, and the witness said he didn't 18 stations relate to the 30+0-0 to 36+90?
19 know. 19 A. Well, they're off the page. They're
20 MR. STONE: 20 way over on this end. Okay?
21 Go forward. 21 Q. Okay.
22 MR. BRUNO: 22 A. The only section that represents, on
23 Thank you. 23 this page, sheet 7, would be -- it goes from 30
24 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 24 to 36 -- would be this one down here.
25 Q. So at the north breach, 25 (Indicating.) 22 to 56.
6 (Pages 18 to 21)
Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285
GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 22 Page 24
1 Q. All right. So that the one that 1 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
2 you've highlighted, what station -- if you 2 Q. Is there a datum referenced on the
3 don't mind, let's highlight that in pink. It's 3 document which we've marked as Plaintiffs'
4 a nice color. 4 Number 3?
5 A. The one that's highlighted is Station 5 A. I don't see it on this section.
6 7+50 to 16+08. 6 Q. All right. Thank you. Okay. Your
7 Q. Okay. And then the one you're 7 biography reflects that you became the chief
8 highlighting in pink is the one you've just 8 for the execution support in the New Orleans
9 described. 9 District Hurricane Protection Office in March
10 A. Right. 10 of 07.
11 Q. Okay. Would you happen to know, 11 A. That's correct.
12 Mr. Grieshaber, if the one in pink, the 16+ to 12 Q. Was there such an office before
13 22, do you know where that is? 13 Hurricane Katrina?
14 A. You'd have to look on a plan map. 14 A. No, there was not. This office was
15 It's however many feet it lays out. 15 developed for the rebuilding of the hurricane
16 Q. Okay. From this location. 16 protection system.
17 A. Correct. 17 Q. Okay. It says here that you've served
18 Q. All right, sir. But it appears that 18 your time. You've got 30 years in.
19 from 1+57 -- I'm sorry. From 0 to 56, all of 19 A. Yes. That is true.
20 these elevations show a sheet pile tip of -8. 20 Q. God bless you. And the majority of
21 A. That's correct. 21 your time has been spent at the geotechnical
22 Q. All right. Do you know if the 0 is 22 branch in the engineering division.
23 the start point and the 56 is this finish 23 A. That's correct.
24 point? 24 Q. So you've seen some folks come and go
25 A. I'd have to see the plans to know. 25 over time.
Page 23 Page 25
1 Q. Okay. All right. Fair enough. 1 A. Yes, I have.
2 Now, these plans are dated November 2 Q. For the record, would you share with
3 '69, with an added note January 14, 1970. 3 us what is a geotechnical engineer?
4 Can we conclude that what's depicted 4 A. Geotechnical engineering, um -- is the
5 here was as built at the time of Hurricane 5 study of soils and their response to loading,
6 Katrina? 6 and it is an area of engineering that addresses
7 A. To the best of my knowledge, that's 7 how loads are transferred into soils, how
8 what was there. 8 they're carried by soils.
9 Q. Okay. And can we also accept this to 9 Q. Okay. Does it include the study of
10 accurately reflect the sheet pipe tip depths in 10 underseepage as it relates to levees?
11 place from 1969 to the time of Katrina? 11 A. Yes, it does.
12 A. We should be able to. 12 Q. Okay. Can you tell me where you
13 Q. Okay. Good. Thank you very much. 13 worked from 1999 until Hurricane Katrina?
14 A. Now, that's dependent on which datum 14 A. I was in the geotechnical branch up
15 you tied to. 15 and to around 2002. I did a short stint of
16 Q. Of course. 16 four months as a chief of civil branch, and
17 A. Okay. 17 then I became the assistant chief of
18 Q. Do you know if the datum changed, that 18 engineering division.
19 is -- forgive me. The datum that the Corps was 19 Q. All right. So let's see now. You
20 using in 1969, did it change up until the time 20 became the assistant chief of the engineering
21 of Hurricane Katrina? 21 division in approximately what year?
22 MR. STONE: 22 A. Um -- I guess it was late '02, early
23 Objection. 23 '03.
24 A. I would have to see the datum 24 Q. All right. And you were the chief
25 referenced on the plans to say for sure. 25 of -- I'm sorry. Of?
7 (Pages 22 to 25)
Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285
GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 26 Page 28
1 A. Civil branch. 1 A. No. What happens, there was an actual
2 Q. For the civil branch. 2 contract out there --
3 A. And that was from August until -- it 3 Q. Right.
4 was like four months. 4 A. -- and the work was done by the
5 Q. Until you became the assistance 5 contractor. Um -- a task order was set up with
6 chief -- 6 certain requirements in it. There was someone
7 A. Right. 7 from construction division who oversaw that
8 Q. -- of engineering division. 8 contract. And as far as the geotechnical
9 And what was your role in the 9 branch would go, problems or concerns of a
10 geotechnical branch? 10 geotechnical nature that are identified by the
11 A. Um -- I was a section chief in the 11 construction individual would come back through
12 structural section. At the time, geotech was 12 engineering, and if they're geotechnical in
13 broken down into two distinct design sections; 13 nature they would go to the geotech branch to
14 one was structures, and one was dams, levees 14 look at, make recommendations on,
15 and channel slopes. 15 interpretations of.
16 Q. Are you familiar with the east bank 16 Q. All right. Now, when you say the
17 area and the work that was done by the 17 construction individual, are you referring to a
18 Washington Group International in that area? 18 Corps employee?
19 A. I know -- I know excavations were done 19 A. A Corps employee.
20 as part of an HTRW cleanup. 20 Q. All right. And that would be the same
21 Q. What I'd like to do first is 21 guy, whoever was in charge of the construction
22 understand how the organization -- which part 22 contract.
23 or components of the organization would have 23 A. Correct.
24 been responsible for overseeing this project. 24 Q. All right, sir. Do you recall who
25 Okay? 25 that was?
Page 27 Page 29
1 MR. STONE: 1 A. Not really.
2 Joe, I'm going to object to this 2 Q. Lee Guillory?
3 line of questioning, but I'm not going 3 A. That's a possibility. He was here.
4 to instruct the witness not to answer. 4 Q. And I know you're not designated for
5 I'll give you some leeway on it. But 5 that. I'm trying to get some reference points
6 he's here as a 30(b)(6) witness on 6 here.
7 these topics that we've listed. 7 A. Okay.
8 MR. BRUNO: 8 Q. So but the bottom line is, though,
9 All right. 9 that the way the Corps is organized, you in
10 MR. STONE: 10 geotechnical support don't go out to the site
11 So proceed, if you would, but I 11 to see what problems exist, you respond to
12 do object. 12 requests for assistance by the Corps
13 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 13 construction person who may or may not have
14 Q. Well, to get right to the point, I 14 been Mr. Guillory.
15 guess what I'd like to know is, you've been 15 A. There are site visits. There's no one
16 designated as the 30(b)(6) witness for these 16 restricting site visits. But as far as going
17 areas. These areas obviously regard work done 17 out to look at a particular aspect, it's
18 in that area. 18 usually a request from the construction side of
19 A. Okay. 19 the house to have an engineering individual
20 Q. What I'm trying to figure out is who 20 come look at something. We send individuals
21 would have been in charge of the day-to-day 21 out to jobs so they're knowledgeable of what's
22 responsibilities as related to these issues in 22 going on, to see just the day-to-day operations
23 this notice within the organizational structure 23 of the jobs. But it's strictly as an
24 at the Corps during the time that WGI did this 24 oversight, you know, so that they're -- they
25 work. Would it have been you, for example? 25 can learn what's going on out there and
8 (Pages 26 to 29)
Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285
GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 30 Page 32
1 hopefully take some of that and have a better 1 This document regards the construction
2 understanding the next time we get into a 2 of the new lock, which is obviously
3 situation like this. But problems, you know, 3 why the work was done to clear out the
4 that's a totally different thing; there's a 4 area next to the east bank industrial
5 formal process where they actually go to 5 site.
6 engineering division for help. 6 A. This is a part of one of the designs
7 Q. Are you familiar with this document 7 that was done for the float in scheme of the
8 which -- 8 IHNC lock.
9 MR. BRUNO: 9 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
10 Let's pass it around first. 10 Q. Right.
11 MR. STONE: 11 A. Have I gone through it and looked at
12 The parties have agreed that we'd 12 it?
13 just pass the document to Mr. Treeby 13 Q. No. No. That wasn't the question.
14 and then down to me and to the 14 All I want to know is --
15 witness. 15 A. Got it.
16 MR. JOANEN: 16 Q. I'm not playing that with you. I just
17 And this is from the IPET 17 wanted to know if you're familiar with --
18 website. 18 A. Yes, I am. There were designs done in
19 MR. TREEBY: 19 association with the, um -- the float in scheme
20 Does this have Bates numbers? 20 of the IHNC lock.
21 MR. JOANEN: 21 Q. All right. For the purposes of the
22 No. It's from the IPET website. 22 record, what we have shown the witness is a
23 MR. TREEBY: 23 document that is entitled Inner Harbor
24 Since I'm sure you'll ask the 24 Navigation Canal Lock Replacement Project,
25 witness this, but since it's doesn't 25 Orleans Parish, Louisiana, Lateral Flood
Page 31 Page 33
1 have Bates numbers, would you have the 1 Protection Design Report, Contract Number DACW
2 witness, or would you, Joe, just read 2 29-99-D-0022, prepared for the Department of
3 the title on the document? 3 the Army, the New Orleans District Corps of
4 MR. BRUNO: 4 Engineers, New Orleans, Louisiana, prepared by
5 If he doesn't know anything about 5 Brown, Cunningham & Gannuch, Engineers,
6 it I may not even do that. 6 Architects and Consultants, who are located at
7 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 7 2701 Kingman Street, Metairie, Louisiana, if
8 Q. The question on the table, 8 one should need engineering services.
9 Mr. Grieshaber, is just to take a look at the 9 Now, it's a lengthy document and I
10 document for the purposes of ascertaining 10 think there's a something called an
11 whether or not you have any knowledge or 11 alternate -- there it is. To be fair, there's
12 information about the document or the subject 12 a second document behind it that simply says
13 of the document. 13 Lateral Flood Protection, DDR Number 2,
14 MR. STONE: 14 Alternative Study, same contract number, same
15 Now, that's -- I mean, this 15 engineers and architects.
16 gentleman is really a knowledgeable 16 Now, all I want to know is, do you
17 person in the Corps. He probably 17 know whether or not this design called for the
18 knows a lot about all this stuff. 18 installation of sheet pile to a depth of I
19 MR. BRUNO: 19 think it's over 60 feet around this lock?
20 It ain't that hard. 20 A. I would have to see the design to see
21 MR. STONE: 21 what loading they were using.
22 If you've got a specific question 22 Q. Okay.
23 about it -- 23 A. Off the top of my head I don't know
24 MR. BRUNO: 24 what the tip elevation is in that report, no.
25 That's a very specific question. 25 Q. All right. That's fine. That's fine.
9 (Pages 30 to 33)
Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285
GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 34 Page 36
1 Do you know if this design called for 1 really try.
2 the installation of sheet pile for the purposes 2 But what I'm trying to learn is is
3 of cutting off underseepage that may have been 3 that when the Corps, in a situation like this,
4 caused or may be caused by the dredging of the 4 is dredging to 36 feet, possibly -- I know that
5 canal to the depth of 36 feet for ships, I 5 the plans are not set in stone yet. Are they?
6 think it's 21 feet for barges? 6 A. No, they're not.
7 A. I would have to go through the report 7 Q. Okay. Would the Corps consider the
8 to know that. 8 necessity, perhaps, of installing a sheet pile
9 Q. Okay. As a person knowledgeable about 9 to cut off the potential for underseepage under
10 underseepage and its effect, is that something 10 the flood protection structure that may or may
11 that the Corps would consider to be possibly 11 not be affected by such dredging to 36-foot
12 necessary if one were to dig a channel to 12 depth?
13 36 feet in the location of the proposed lock 13 MR. STONE:
14 site? 14 Object to the hypothetical.
15 MR. STONE: 15 MR. BRUNO:
16 Objection. You say is that 16 Okay.
17 something. What does that 17 A. In the course of the design, we look
18 something -- what does that mean? 18 at all aspects of the geotechnical loading that
19 MR. BRUNO: 19 a wall could see. And one of the aspects we
20 I don't know. 20 would look at is the effect of seepage. If in
21 MR. STONE: 21 fact there is a seepage issue, then we would
22 Are you adding onto your previous 22 mitigate that seepage issue by a number of
23 question and using the previous 23 different methods, and one of them could be,
24 question? 24 you know, driving sheets deep enough to either
25 MR. BRUNO: 25 cut off the seepage or lengthen the path of
Page 35 Page 37
1 I don't get it. The question is 1 seepage.
2 what it is. You can object to form. 2 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
3 The witness can tell me, Joe, I don't 3 Q. Now, I'm just curious, because as I
4 know what the heck you're talking 4 was looking at this document, and I'm showing
5 about. 5 you page Plate III-3. This design, that is,
6 MR. STONE: 6 this design for this lock replacement
7 Object to form. 7 project -- again, understanding it hasn't been
8 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 8 adopted by the Corps -- calls for another
9 Q. We made the deal, you and I, right? 9 floodwall to be built outside of the existing
10 A. Okay. Got it. 10 floodwall. At least this is pre-Katrina, so
11 Q. He's objecting to form, which means he 11 I'm going to say the then existing floodwall,
12 doesn't get it, which is fine. It's possible 12 for the completeness of the question.
13 that -- there's a lot of reasons for that. But 13 Is that accurate?
14 I want to talk to you. And if you didn't get 14 A. Yes, that's what it's calling for.
15 it, I will re -- 15 Q. All right. Now, I guess what I'm
16 A. Okay, then let's start all over again. 16 curious about is, I see -- and maybe I'm
17 Q. Fair enough. Okay. Well, let's do it 17 reading it wrong, but I see that the sheet pile
18 the hard way. Do you have any knowledge of 18 tip is 65 feet.
19 what -- 19 A. That's correct.
20 A. We don't have to do it the hard way. 20 Q. All right. Now, so I'm wondering, is
21 However you want to do it. 21 that sheet pile tip depth necessary in order to
22 Q. All right. Well, I'm just trying to 22 keep the sheet pile from sinking into the
23 give some background because I'm trying to 23 earth? Is that the reason why it's so deep?
24 avoid future -- I always try to avoid the 24 A. Okay. Looking at this one plate, we
25 objections. People don't believe that. I 25 need to clarify that this is being loaded by
10 (Pages 34 to 37)
Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285
GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 38 Page 40
1 Mississippi River water, the top of the sheet 1 A. Okay? Computer program were provided
2 pile is 23, and the elevation on the opposite 2 in plate 3-16, 3-17, for I-walls on the east
3 side is 0, which is a 23-foot head. This plate 3 side of the canal.
4 that we're looking at is a strictly a stability 4 Q. Right.
5 plate. Now, without weighing into the entire 5 A. Seawall sheet computer data for each
6 process, I can't tell you whether or not 6 case is provided in Appendix A, which is
7 they're using this sheet pile to cut off a 7 nothing but the computer printout. The results
8 failure surface or whether it's in here for 8 of the seepage analysis for each design case
9 seepage. Just looking at the stratification, 9 are provided on Plate 3-3 through 3-15.
10 I'm not really seeing why it would be in here 10 Q. All right. But that's what we're
11 for seepage cutoff. But I mean I'd have to 11 looking at right? We were looking at III-7.
12 weigh into the report. You can also use sheet 12 A. You'll have to show me. I don't think
13 pile to cut off a failure surface, and that may 13 that's what it was.
14 be what they're using it for. 14 Q. Maybe I screwed up. It's entirely
15 Q. Okay. Thank you. Would you take a 15 possible. But it does say that the results of
16 quick look at Page 3-7 just the check to see if 16 the seepage analysis for each design case are
17 maybe seepage was in fact one of the 17 provided on Plates III-3 through III-15.
18 considerations for that sheet pile tip 18 A. Okay. Got it.
19 elevation? 19 Q. Got it. All right. You're the
20 MR. STONE: 20 expert. I don't know.
21 Objection. The report speaks for 21 Okay. Here is, I think, III-3, and
22 itself. 22 then the rest follow in seriatim. And take a
23 A. Okay, this is just a standard 23 quick look at that for me.
24 statement that you would make as far as I-wall 24 A. It says, based on Lane's Weighted
25 seepage analysis. It says the minimum sheet 25 Creep Ratio analysis, a minimum factor of
Page 39 Page 41
1 pile tip elevation was determined from the 1 safety of 3 against piping is achieved for a
2 worst case. Tip elevation based on 2 sheet pile tip at elevation -16 based on a
3 overturning, which is the stability of the 3 water elevation of 22.
4 wall -- 4 Q. Okay.
5 Q. Uh-huh. 5 A. Okay? So that was not a governing
6 A. -- tip elevation based on the 3:1 6 case. That's why this is a stability.
7 penetration ratio, or a tip elevation based on 7 Q. Right. Now, but what we have here is
8 seepage. 8 an analysis of this design, and we are trying
9 Q. All right. And then it talks about 9 to determine whether or not seepage is a
10 the plates right below it. 10 problem. Right?
11 A. Sheet pile overturning analysis was 11 A. And it is not.
12 formed by seawall sheet, computer program and 12 Q. And is it not, in this location.
13 appropriate USACE criteria. Seepage analysis 13 A. Okay.
14 were performed for each design using Lane's 14 Q. And we have a what, you say 16 feet
15 Weighted Creep Ratio. All seepage analysis 15 was deemed --
16 contained a minimum factor of safety of 3 16 A. -16.
17 against piping. 17 Q. -16.
18 Q. Okay. And then doesn't it refer to 18 A. And that's from water at the top of a
19 the actual plates that we were just looking at? 19 well at 22, I think it is.
20 A. Right. But these plates are stability 20 Q. All right. Now, so obviously, then,
21 plates. The results of the sheet pile analysis 21 the Corps regards it as necessary to the design
22 using seawall sheet. We were looking at a 22 of a structure that is going to be placed near
23 stability plate. That was not a seawall sheet 23 a hurricane protection structure to do analysis
24 plate. 24 to determine whether or not underseepage could
25 Q. All right. 25 potentially be a problem, right?
11 (Pages 38 to 41)
Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285
GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 42 Page 44
1 A. That's correct. 1 within these categories --
2 Q. Okay. Now, and I understand that this 2 MR. BRUNO:
3 New Orleans District has in place a set of 3 It's 28.
4 guidelines or procedures that one is supposed 4 MR. STONE:
5 to follow anytime one does any digging around a 5 Okay. Let's look at 28 quickly.
6 flood protection structure. Is that true? 6 MR. BRUNO:
7 A. We'd follow the design guidelines. We 7 You can look at 28 all day long.
8 make sure that whatever is done does not 8 I mean, I'm not going the play this
9 violate the integrity of whatever the flood 9 game, Richard, of having to test each
10 protection is. 10 question against the --
11 Q. All right. But do you know 11 MR. STONE:
12 Mr. Colletti? 12 I disagree. It doesn't fit
13 A. Jerry Colletti. 13 within 28.
14 Q. You know Jerry? 14 MR. BRUNO:
15 A. Yes. 15 That's what I'm saying. Do you
16 Q. And we took Jerry 's deposition, and 16 want -- I mean, you and I are going
17 Jerry told us -- and I could be wrong, so just 17 the disagree all day long.
18 take this at face value -- that in this office, 18 MR. STONE:
19 if you do any digging within 300 feet of a 19 It may happen.
20 flood control structure you're supposed to get 20 MR. BRUNO:
21 a permit. Now, is he wrong? 21 It's going to happen.
22 MR. STONE: 22 MR. STONE:
23 Objection to foundation and 23 Okay.
24 overbreadth. 24 MR. BRUNO:
25 MR. BRUNO: 25 Okay? Now, the question is, do
Page 43 Page 45
1 Okay. Fine. 1 we get through this or do we just
2 A. To my knowledge, that is a criteria 2 adjourn and do this in the courtroom,
3 that operations applies to permit requirements. 3 which I'm happy to do?
4 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 4 MR. STONE:
5 Q. All right. You'll have to help me 5 I have an objection pending.
6 understand that sentence. 6 MR. TREEBY:
7 A. Okay. Operations -- 7 It's just an objection.
8 Q. All right. Let's do it this way: 8 MR. BRUNO:
9 A. Okay. 9 I understand that, but I can't
10 Q. John Doe wants to dig a hole within 10 relate to these objections because
11 300 feet of the Lower Ninth Ward east bank 11 they don't make any sense to me.
12 protection I-wall that's in place before 12 You're required to object to form.
13 Katrina. 13 MR. STONE:
14 A. Okay. 14 Object to form.
15 Q. Okay? Now, what if anything does John 15 MR. BRUNO:
16 Doe need to do before John Doe sticks his spade 16 All right. That's fine. I got
17 into the ground? 17 that one. Now let's go back to where
18 A. He needs to -- 18 we were.
19 MR. STONE: 19 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
20 Objection. That doesn't fit with 20 Q. John Doe is putting his spade into the
21 any of the categories of the things 21 ground, he's within 300 feet.
22 that you've -- now, I'll let the 22 Would you agree with me that if you
23 witness answer this question, but I 23 put the spade into the ground that you're going
24 want you to understand that when he's 24 to disturb the soil?
25 speaking here to something other than 25 A. That's correct.
12 (Pages 42 to 45)
Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285
GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 46 Page 48
1 Q. That's correct. Okay. Now, and is 1 identify it, if you don't mind.
2 that something that would require some kind of 2 A. Okay.
3 in evaluation by the Corps? 3 Q. Thanks.
4 A. That would require a permit, that's 4 MR. BRUNO:
5 correct. 5 For the record, this is
6 Q. All right. It requires a permit. All 6 Geotechnical Design and Dam Safety
7 right. 7 Section, Construction Guidance page,
8 Now, how does one know that one needs 8 and it is attached to something called
9 a permit? I mean, is there a sign, you know, 9 Guidance for Work Proposed Near or
10 next to the floodwall that says, hey, fellows, 10 Within a Federally Constructed Flood
11 if you guys are going to dig, come get a 11 Control Project.
12 permit? 12 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
13 MR. STONE: 13 Q. Now, you've already testified you
14 Objection again. Permitting is 14 haven't seen this. I will represent to you
15 not part of this analysis. It's not 15 that this is a document prepared by the
16 part of what you've asked for here. 16 district office in Kansas City. Okay?
17 It's not part of -- 17 A. Okay.
18 MR. BRUNO: 18 Q. All right, sir. Now, while you may
19 I respectfully disagree. 19 not have seen this particular document, have
20 MR. STONE: 20 you seen documents which give guidance for work
21 It is not part of what we've 21 proposed near or within a federally constructed
22 presented this witness for, so 22 flood control project?
23 permitting is not part of it. 23 A. Off the top open my head I don't
24 MR. BRUNO: 24 remember, but I would think I probably have.
25 All right. Fine. 25 We do have processes and procedures, but I
Page 47 Page 49
1 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 1 can't give them to you off the top of my head.
2 Q. Mr. Grieshaber, how does a person know 2 Q. That's fine. All right.
3 that you need to get a permit? 3 Does this office, the New Orleans
4 A. The same way you know any of the 4 District office, have a written guideline for
5 rules. It's posted. If you're in the business 5 guidance for work proposed near or within a
6 of doing excavations, you've seen the thing 6 federally constructed flood control project?
7 you've got to call Louisiana One Call, if 7 A. Um -- yes. There is. You would have
8 you're too close to a flood protection you've 8 to ask Mr. Colletti, you know, for copies of
9 got to get a permit. Um -- you know, there are 9 it.
10 probably people who could swear ignorance and 10 Q. Okay. Well, Mr. Colletti told us
11 tell the truth -- 11 there wasn't a written one.
12 Q. Sure. 12 A. There is a, um -- there are
13 A. -- but this is -- people who do this 13 guidelines, and that's the question that you
14 type work know you need a permit. 14 asked, that are established. And as far as I
15 Q. All right. Let me show you a document 15 know, and we're going back ancient history when
16 which we've marked as Plaintiffs' Number 4. 16 Jerry Satterlee was chief of engineering
17 And the purpose of the question first is just 17 division, they definitely existed.
18 to ask you whether or not you've ever seen this 18 Q. All right. Well, let me see, just for
19 document. 19 the record, because I want us to make certain
20 (Exhibit 4 was marked for 20 that we're, you know, not talking at
21 identification and is attached hereto.) 21 cross-purposes. The Corps has -- I'm trying to
22 A. I don't remember ever seeing this 22 find the right -- precise word.
23 particular document. 23 They're called EMs?
24 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 24 A. Engineering manuals.
25 Q. All right. Let me just for the record 25 Q. Engineering manual. And why don't you
13 (Pages 46 to 49)
Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285
GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 50 Page 52
1 tell us first, what is an engineering manual? 1 that document in your hand.
2 A. Engineering manual -- an engineering 2 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
3 manual is a document that guides designers in 3 Q. All right. Okay.
4 some aspect of a design. 4 A. But for the interest of clarity, an
5 Q. Okay. And these are drafted by the 5 engineering manual with its guidelines, okay,
6 Corps of Engineers? 6 is a tool that's used. It may be that there
7 A. They're usually drafted by the Corps 7 are things that are unique in Kansas City that
8 of Engineers. They're -- they sometimes engage 8 require them to have certain processes and
9 expertise outside the Corps of Engineers, 9 procedures in place that are not necessarily
10 whatever is required to get the right team to 10 have to be in place in Little Rock District or
11 put it together. 11 some other districts.
12 Q. All right, sir. And there are 12 Q. Okay. Well, let me show you -- have
13 engineering guidelines for the design and 13 you ever seen this before? (Tendering.)
14 construction of levees, right? 14 A. This is the retaining -- this is a
15 A. Yes, there are. 15 retaining and floodwall EM.
16 Q. And there are engineering guidelines 16 Q. Okay. I understand that, but --
17 for retaining and floodwalls. 17 A. Dated 1989.
18 A. That's correct. 18 Q. -- have you ever seen it?
19 Q. There are engineering guidelines for 19 A. Yes, I have.
20 the design of a sheet pile wall; right? 20 Q. Do you use it?
21 A. That's correct. 21 A. We probably use aspects of it. I'm
22 Q. There are guidelines for seepage 22 not saying we follow it specifically, without
23 analysis and control for dams; right? 23 getting into it step by step.
24 A. That's correct. 24 Q. All right.
25 Q. And these are engineering guidelines 25 A. Um --
Page 51 Page 53
1 that this office, and you in particular, 1 Q. Does it provide guidance with
2 reference in order to assist you in performing 2 regard --
3 engineering services in support of the district 3 A. It provides guidance.
4 office, right? 4 Q. All right. With regard specifically
5 A. They're one of the tools that we use 5 to the business of evaluating excavations near
6 in design, that's correct. 6 floodwalls?
7 Q. All right, sir. And they're also in 7 A. I don't know. The way we would
8 particular one of the tools that you use in 8 evaluate an excavation near the floodwall is to
9 order to evaluate excavations around flood 9 verify that the excavation does not jeopardize
10 control projects, right? 10 the integrity of the floodwall. I don't know
11 A. One of the tools, yes. 11 if there is any kind of rule of thumb or
12 Q. One of the tools, all right. Fine. 12 something in here.
13 Now, I asked you those questions, 13 Q. Okay. All right. That's fine.
14 Mr. Grieshaber, because I wanted to see if 14 MR. STONE:
15 there's a distinction that could be made 15 When you get to a good stopping
16 between these engineering guidelines and a 16 point --
17 document like was prepared by the Kansas City 17 MR. BRUNO:
18 office which is sort of a written -- their own 18 Fine. Take one now.
19 written interpretation of these guidelines and 19 (Brief recess.)
20 what one should do. 20 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
21 Do you see such a distinction between 21 Q. I think the last comment you made was
22 this and the engineering manual? 22 that obviously the district office here, in
23 MR. STONE: 23 assessing excavations near floodwalls, does
24 Objection. 24 what it thinks is appropriate to assess whether
25 A. First of all, I don't know what's in 25 there's a potential impact on the wall. Right?
14 (Pages 50 to 53)
Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285
GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 54 Page 56
1 A. Correct. 1 A. Obviously I'm not making myself clear.
2 Q. And you don't have a set of written 2 We go back to the design. The design is based
3 guidelines to guide you, you just simply make 3 on certain conditions. We modify those
4 reference, yourself, to existing engineering 4 conditions consistent with what that excavation
5 manuals and the guidelines and statements 5 would be and see if in fact that violates the
6 therein. 6 minimum factor of safety of design.
7 A. We have a process -- if we want to 7 Q. Okay. Do you see this document here?
8 talk specifically to walls, we have process and 8 This is a part of the Kansas City document,
9 procedure by which these walls are designed, 9 Plaintiffs' Exhibit Number 4. (Tendering.)
10 and when we make that evaluation we make sure 10 A. Okay.
11 that we do not compromise the stability of the 11 Q. You see it's a checklist?
12 walls, which means we do have a procedure that 12 A. Okay.
13 we're checking. 13 Q. All right. And it's a checklist about
14 Q. Wait. Now, that regards design of the 14 the proposed excavation, right?
15 wall, though, right? 15 A. That's what it looks to be.
16 A. That's correct. 16 Q. All right. So there's a process that
17 Q. We're not talking about design of the 17 at least in Kansas City they go through to
18 wall. We're talking about -- remember, our 18 evaluate not the wall but the hole. Right?
19 John Doe who is about to put his spade into the 19 A. I haven't -- okay. I'll take your
20 earth within 300 feet of the wall. That's what 20 word for it. I have not read the document.
21 we're talking about. 21 Q. Well, it says checklist, construction
22 A. Okay. That's what I am talking about; 22 in the critical area of flood control projects
23 design. 23 constructed by the Corps of Engineers.
24 Q. Of the wall or the hole? 24 A. I would think it is to determine the
25 A. Of the wall. You said, the wall is 25 impact of the hole on the design.
Page 55 Page 57
1 designed. The configuration of the wall -- 1 Q. Absolutely. All right.
2 Q. Right. 2 A. Okay.
3 A. -- is designed to carry a certain 3 Q. So we have to know a little bit about
4 loading. 4 the hole.
5 Q. Okay. 5 A. Correct.
6 A. And we check to make sure that the 6 Q. The point is, though, there is a
7 excavation does not reduce the ability of that 7 written checklist that guides the Kansas City
8 wall to carry that loading. 8 guys through the process of this evaluation,
9 Q. Okay. 9 right?
10 A. So we go back to the design of the 10 A. That's what you say -- that's what
11 wall -- 11 you're saying that is, yes.
12 Q. All right. 12 Q. Well, is it not that?
13 A. -- and use excavation in the design 13 MR. STONE:
14 and see if it in fact impacts the stability of 14 Objection here. The witness not
15 the wall. So we have -- in order to determine 15 have personal knowledge of Kansas
16 whether or not the excavation is impacting the 16 City 's guidelines.
17 wall, we have to look at the wall design. 17 MR. BRUNO:
18 Q. Okay. That's fine. Okay. But you 18 There's piece of paper right in
19 said you had a procedure in place to do that. 19 front of him.
20 A. To do design. 20 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
21 Q. Okay. Now, my question, though, was 21 Q. Does the piece of paper not do that?
22 not whether there was a written procedure to do 22 You can tell me that.
23 design, my question is whether or not there's a 23 A. I don't know.
24 written procedure to guide you through the 24 Q. You don't know. Fair enough.
25 evaluation of this proposed digging. 25 A. I don't know what is in that document.
15 (Pages 54 to 57)
Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285
GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 58 Page 60
1 I can read the first page from three feet away. 1 several times already. The wall is already in
2 Q. Okay. And I'll take -- I'm not going 2 place --
3 to be as accused of that. You can take the 3 A. Okay.
4 checklist and you can look at it. Okay? It's 4 Q. -- right?
5 not long. And what I want know is really 5 Okay. So what we're evaluating,
6 simply this: Whether or not this is a 6 Mr. Grieshaber, is whether or not the proposed
7 checklist the purpose of which is to guide the 7 work will affect the design. I recognize that
8 Kansas City office through the process of 8 part of the process would require that you
9 evaluating work proposed to be done within the 9 evaluate the design of the wall. But I'm not
10 vicinity of a flood control project. If it's 10 asking you about that. I'm asking you about
11 not that, then it's not that. Fair enough. 11 the process by which you evaluate the proposed
12 MR. STONE: 12 work. Okay? That is what I want to
13 Objection. The document speaks 13 understand.
14 for itself. 14 Is it written or not? The process of
15 MR. BRUNO: 15 evaluating the work.
16 Apparently it doesn't. Right? 16 A. The process by which we evaluate the
17 Because the witness says he can't 17 permit for the work is to go and determine the
18 tell. So he's reviewing it now. 18 impact of that work on the design. Now, is
19 A. Okay. It is a list of all the things 19 that written on a piece of paper? I don't
20 that they're documenting that they looked into. 20 think so.
21 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 21 Q. Fair enough. That's all I wanted to
22 Q. Right. Okay. 22 find out. Thank you.
23 A. Okay. 23 A. Okay.
24 Q. So it's a checklist that these guys 24 Q. We got that. It's not written down.
25 use? 25 So you'll understand why I would ask
Page 59 Page 61
1 A. Okay. 1 this question, how do you guys know what to do
2 Q. Here's the question: Do you guys, the 2 when you evaluate proposed work that's in the
3 New Orleans office, have such a checklist? 3 vicinity of a floodwall?
4 A. We do not have that detailed 4 A. We take the proposed work --
5 checklist. What we do have is a process in 5 Q. Okay.
6 place -- 6 A. -- and see what the impact of the
7 Q. All right. 7 proposed work is on the design.
8 A. -- by which we visit the design and 8 Q. Please go slow. I'm writing this
9 determine the impact of the hole. 9 down.
10 Q. Is that process written down 10 A. Got it.
11 somewhere? 11 Q. You take the proposed work and you
12 A. The design process is written down. 12 determine --
13 Q. No, no, no, no. I didn't ask you 13 A. The impact of the proposed work on the
14 about the design process. You just told me, we 14 design of the wall.
15 have a process with which we visit the design 15 Q. Okay. Fair enough. Now, is there --
16 of the proposed work to determine whether or 16 there's no writing that will guide you through
17 not it may negatively impact the flood control 17 this determination process, right?
18 structure. 18 A. You revisit the design. The same
19 Isn't that what you just told me? 19 rule -- the same process you use in design you
20 A. The design is a process that's 20 use in doing that.
21 documented. Okay? We agree to that. 21 Q. Okay. All right. So it's almost like
22 Q. The design of what? 22 you're redesigning the wall.
23 A. The design of a floodwall is a 23 A. You're revisiting the design of the
24 documented process. 24 wall. That's correct.
25 Q. Yeah. And we've been over that 25 Q. Right. Because you designed the wall
16 (Pages 58 to 61)
Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285
GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 62 Page 64
1 with certain things in place back when you 1 -- of topics that you've listed.
2 built it, and now you've got this person who 2 MR. BRUNO:
3 wants to do this work so you're basically 3 I'm on the list. In fact, if you
4 reevaluating the design with this new work in 4 would let the witness answer the
5 place; is that fair enough? 5 question, you'll understand why this
6 A. That's correct. Correct. 6 is germane to the subject of the
7 Q. Okay. Now, you'll remember a couple 7 deposition.
8 of weeks ago we had the high water on the 8 MR. STONE:
9 river? 9 The witness has answered all your
10 A. Correct. 10 questions, but I'm objecting now
11 Q. All right. And you remember that this 11 because you can't --
12 office -- at least it was reported in the news 12 MR. BRUNO:
13 that this office had given instruction that 13 No, you keep objecting, and you
14 anybody who was doing any construction work on 14 keep --
15 the protected side of the levees had to stop 15 MR. STONE:
16 that construction work during this high water 16 -- stay with the topics.
17 period. You remember that? 17 MR. BRUNO:
18 A. Correct. 18 And through those objections
19 Q. Did that actually happen? 19 you're instructing the witness.
20 A. Yes. 20 (Off the record.)
21 Q. Okay. All right. Tell me why that 21 MR. STONE:
22 happened. 22 Stick with the topics.
23 MR. STONE: 23 MR. BRUNO:
24 Objection. You're continuing to 24 I am.
25 go off of the list -- 25 MR. STONE:
Page 63 Page 65
1 MR. BRUNO: 1 All right. Let's get back to the
2 No, you -- 2 topics.
3 MR. STONE: 3 MR. BRUNO:
4 No, you're going to let me give 4 And I'm tired of you suggesting
5 my objection. 5 that I'm off the -- I'm on topic. You
6 MR. BRUNO: 6 don't know what you're talking about.
7 No, you're not. No speaking 7 I know what I'm talking about, because
8 objections. Call the judge. 8 you don't know why I'm asking the
9 MR. STONE: 9 questions.
10 You're -- 10 MR. STONE:
11 MR. BRUNO: 11 The record will reflect who's on
12 There's no speaking objections. 12 topic.
13 MR. STONE: 13 MR. BRUNO:
14 This has nothing to do with what 14 I know you don't want me to ask
15 he's talking about now. This is your 15 these questions, and I understand
16 going off the list here. 16 that.
17 MR. BRUNO: 17 MR. STONE:
18 I'm not going off the list, and 18 You're off topic here.
19 I'll be happy to show you -- 19 MR. BRUNO:
20 MR. STONE: 20 I'm not off topic. Now you done?
21 At some point you to need to come 21 MR. STONE:
22 back to the list -- 22 I'm done.
23 MR. BRUNO: 23 MR. BRUNO:
24 I'm on the list. 24 Good.
25 MR. STONE: 25 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
17 (Pages 62 to 65)
Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285
GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 66 Page 68
1 Q. Now, Mr. Grieshaber -- 1 Q. Is?
2 MR. STONE: 2 A. -- a development of a seepage path.
3 You have an objective pending. 3 Q. Seepage.
4 MR. BRUNO: 4 MR. BRUNO:
5 I understand your objection is 5 Oh, is that not on the subject
6 pending. 6 here?
7 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 7 MR. STONE:
8 Q. -- what was the concern about allowing 8 It's not on the subject at all.
9 folks to do construction during high water when 9 MR. BRUNO:
10 we had high water out here on this river? 10 Whatever you say, Richard.
11 A. The concern is the possibility of 11 MR. STONE:
12 inducing liquefaction as far as pile driving 12 Look at you topics.
13 goes. 13 MR. BRUNO:
14 Q. Right. 14 I understand. Look, if you want
15 A. That's a concern. Another concern. 15 to play games like this all day long,
16 Q. What's so bad about liquefaction; what 16 you just continue to do so.
17 might that cause? 17 MR. STONE:
18 A. Liquefaction could cause a bank 18 You phrased the topics.
19 failure which could eventually lead to a levee 19 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
20 failure. 20 Q. The point is that the district office
21 Q. And what is the mechanism by which 21 in New Orleans gave instruction to folks who
22 liquefaction could cause bank failure? 22 were doing work within how many feet of the
23 A. It's a seismic reaction. 23 levee?
24 Q. All right. Underseepage? Does 24 A. I would have to go look at the news
25 underseepage play a role there? 25 release.
Page 67 Page 69
1 A. No. 1 Q. Within a certain distance from the
2 Q. No underseepage at all? 2 levee, this office told those people don't do
3 A. Not for liquefaction. 3 any work, no pile driving, no construction work
4 Q. All right. That's fine. 4 of any kind because of the potential that that
5 A. Okay? That's -- the pile driving and 5 work may have had to cause damage to the levee.
6 high vibrations could cause liquefaction which 6 Is that right?
7 could cause flow failures of the bank. 7 A. Correct.
8 Q. Uh-huh. 8 Q. All right. And one of the potential
9 A. Another issue is that excavations 9 harms that could have been caused is to promote
10 could end up causing seepage which could cause 10 liquefaction, to promote underseepage, which
11 movement of material from the foundation. 11 would -- could possibly undermine the levee, is
12 Q. All right. So just so we can instruct 12 that true?
13 counsel here, the reason. 13 MR. STONE:
14 MR. STONE: 14 Object to form.
15 I guess I was right, huh? 15 A. That's correct.
16 MR. BRUNO: 16 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
17 No, you're wrong. 17 Q. That's correct. Isn't that amazing.
18 MR. STONE: 18 MR. STONE:
19 I'm absolutely right. 19 Object to the commentary.
20 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 20 MR. BRUNO:
21 Q. Say it again. What did you say about 21 Whatever.
22 underseepage? Maybe he didn't hear you. Say 22 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
23 what you just said about underseepage so he 23 Q. Now, let's see. How important is it
24 gets it. 24 to evaluate proposed work in the vicinity of
25 A. The secondary concern is -- 25 the floodwall? Is it something that you
18 (Pages 66 to 69)
Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285
GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 70 Page 72
1 just -- it's no big deal? Is it important? 1 A. That's a possibility, depending on the
2 You know -- 2 circumstances, the height of the wall --
3 A. I guess the question is what is 3 Q. Okay. All right. Now, I asked that
4 proposed work? 4 question in order to understand this: How
5 Q. All right. Well, that's a good 5 important is this evaluation to the Corps?
6 question. Because since there is nothing 6 MR. STONE:
7 written down, how would one know what proposed 7 Object to form.
8 work would be -- help me with that. What 8 A. I guess I don't understand the
9 proposed work would be the kind of work that 9 question. How important?
10 you guys believe you need to evaluate to 10 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
11 determine whether there's a potential for 11 Q. Yeah.
12 damage to the flood control structure? 12 A. The flood protection is extremely
13 A. Anything that would change the loading 13 important to us. We do not jeopardize the
14 on the wall. 14 flood protection.
15 Q. All right. Well, you would agree 15 Q. All right. I will ask you to accept
16 that's not something that the guy who's digging 16 that Engineering Manual 1110-2-1913 entitled
17 or building the thing could do, that's 17 Design and Construction of Levees, USACE 2000,
18 something that the Corps of Engineers has to 18 states as follows: Without control,
19 do, right? 19 underseepage in pervious foundations beneath
20 A. Correct. 20 levees may result in, a -- and I'll show this
21 Q. Okay. All right. So since the guy 21 to you if you like -- excessive hydrostatic
22 who's doing the work doesn't know it, then, you 22 pressures beneath an impervious top stratum on
23 know, what is the criteria that should be 23 the land side, b, sand boils, and c, piping
24 utilized in order to determine whether or not 24 beneath the levee itself. Underseepage
25 to ask the Corps to do this evaluation? 25 problems are most acute when a pervious stratum
Page 71 Page 73
1 MR. STONE: 1 underlies a levee and extends both landward and
2 Object to form and foundation. 2 riverward of the levee and where a relatively
3 MR. BRUNO: 3 thin top stratum exists on the land side of the
4 It's noted. 4 levee.
5 A. If they're removing any material or 5 All right. Are you familiar with
6 they're adding any material. If they're 6 that?
7 actually changing the cross-section in the 7 A. That's correct.
8 vicinity of the flood protection. 8 Q. All right. And this is the design
9 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 9 consideration that this district office
10 Q. All right. Now, can we agree that 10 follows, right?
11 300 feet is a parameter within which if the 11 A. That's correct.
12 work is proposed that's a start point for 12 Q. All right. What I'd like is for you
13 asking the Corps for an evaluation? Or do we 13 to explain to me how -- and I'll give you an
14 use a different number? 14 example, a hole, all right, 25 feet deep,
15 A. Are you -- if you're looking at a 15 within 30 feet of the levee. First question:
16 one-size-fits-all number, 300 is probably an 16 Is that something that your office would feel
17 acceptable number. 17 that it would need to evaluate to determine
18 Q. Okay. All right. Is that on the 18 whether or not the hole could possibly
19 water side and the land side, or just -- or 19 negatively impact a flood control structure
20 does it matter? 20 like the one that existed at the Lower Nine
21 A. Either side. 21 before Katrina?
22 Q. All right. Okay. But I'm gathering 22 A. It depends when the hole is there. If
23 from your answer that it may well be that 23 the hole is on the flood side --
24 something that's further away than 300 feet may 24 Q. Yes.
25 merit some evaluation. 25 A. -- and, you know, we're outside of
19 (Pages 70 to 73)
Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285
GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 74 Page 76
1 hurricane season and there is no possibility of 1 mindful that it's there. We would be mindful
2 loading of that hole with water, then I 2 of whether or not it's having an impact. Um --
3 wouldn't think it would be jeopardizing it. We 3 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
4 would look at it -- 4 Q. You see, that's what I'm getting
5 Q. Okay. 5 confused by. Because you say you would be
6 A. -- but it would not -- it would not be 6 mindful if it's having an impact only if you
7 jeopardizing the wall 's stability at all. 7 did the evaluation to figure out whether it was
8 Q. All right. Fair enough. 8 having an impact. Right? That's what you just
9 You said you would look at it. 9 told me a couple of minutes ago.
10 A. That's correct. 10 A. Correct.
11 Q. All right. Why? 11 Q. So what I'm trying to figure out is,
12 A. Because anything that impacts the 12 is this something -- and maybe I'm just not
13 cross-sectional geometry of these walls we 13 getting it here -- when someone digs a hole
14 would look at. 14 that deep, is it a mandatory -- is it mandatory
15 Q. All right. 15 for the Corps to evaluate the potential that
16 A. It changes our design conditions. 16 that hole may have on that floodwall?
17 Q. Okay. So did I understand you to say 17 MR. STONE:
18 that it would be permissible to dig a hole 18 Object to foundation.
19 25 feet down and leave the hole open and not 19 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
20 fill it back in? Is that what you're saying to 20 Q. Or is it, you know, discretionary, or
21 me? And again, it's within 300 feet of the -- 21 is it something that the Corps believes it can
22 A. I would have to see the actual case; I 22 simply ignore?
23 would have to see the height of the wall, I 23 MR. STONE:
24 would have to see the stratigraphy, and to see 24 Objection to foundation.
25 if in fact it impacts the stability analysis 25 A. First of all, the Corps would not
Page 75 Page 77
1 and/or seepage analysis. 1 ignore it. Okay?
2 Q. Fair enough. Okay. The point is, 2 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
3 you'd have to do an evaluation. 3 Q. Okay. We've eliminated -- ignoring is
4 A. I'd have to look at it, that's 4 off the table.
5 correct. 5 A. Yes.
6 Q. By the way, you used the word 6 Q. All right. Now, so we've got hole.
7 stratigraphy. 7 We have discretion whereby you look at the hole
8 A. Stratification. 8 and you say, okay, I'm going to walk away.
9 Q. I understand. We have a record. 9 Mandatory means, oh, wait, I've got a hole, I
10 Would you mind defining that for the record? 10 got to do something. Without defining the
11 A. Stratigraphy is the laydown of the 11 something yet.
12 soils and the types of materials versus the 12 So is it mandatory or discretionary
13 properties of the materials. 13 that you do something with regard to that hole?
14 Q. All right. okay. Now, how 14 MR. STONE:
15 important -- I mean, again, we've got this 15 Object to form.
16 hole. This hole is on the water side of the 16 MR. BRUNO:
17 Lower Nine levee. How important is it to the 17 Noted.
18 district office to perform such an evaluation? 18 A. We would do something. Okay?
19 Or is it the kind of thing that you can say, I 19 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
20 don't need to look at it, it's okay, don't 20 Q. Okay. Is it mandatory, though?
21 worry about it, you're on your own? 21 A. Define mandatory.
22 MR. STONE: 22 Q. You got to do it.
23 Object to form. 23 A. It's engineeringly sound to do it --
24 A. I guess I don't understand what you're 24 Q. Okay.
25 asking by how important. You know, we would be 25 A. -- you know.
20 (Pages 74 to 77)
Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285
GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 78 Page 80
1 Q. Thank you. Would it be -- would it 1 Q. Right.
2 violate engineering principles to simply look 2 A. If you go -- if the stage goes higher,
3 at the hole, walk away and do nothing? 3 you have to cease those things.
4 MR. STONE: 4 Q. Right.
5 Object to foundation. Lack of 5 A. But you can come in on a case-by-case
6 foundation. 6 basis, and we will look and see if your case
7 MR. BRUNO: 7 allows you to still be doing whatever task
8 That's fine. 8 you're doing. And we go and look at it as a
9 A. That is not -- 9 design.
10 MR. BRUNO: 10 Q. Exactly?
11 It's your witness, so, you know, 11 A. So it's not a one-size-fits-all type
12 keep saying there's no foundation 12 thing.
13 here. By the way, he's your appointed 13 Q. No. But it's mandatory. What you
14 witness for the Corps. 14 just described to me is mandatory. You either
15 MR. STONE: 15 stop or you let us look at it, and if we can
16 It's your question which lacks 16 assess it and we're comfortable that you're not
17 foundation. 17 going to do something to hurt our levee, we'll
18 MR. BRUNO: 18 let you to it. The point I think you're making
19 With all due respect, no, sir. 19 to us on this record is that it's a mandatory
20 A. Let's start all over again. What's 20 evaluation, this not something that you take
21 the question? 21 very lightly, because you could floods the
22 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 22 city. Isn't that right?
23 Q. The question is this: I'm trying to 23 MR. STONE:
24 get sense of the degree to which there is a 24 Objection. Ambiguous.
25 requirement by your office, and frankly that's 25 A. Yes.
Page 79 Page 81
1 why I brought up the business of the high water 1 MR. BRUNO:
2 on the Mississippi River and the construction. 2 Yeah. Flooding the city is
3 That was a mandatory situation, was it 3 ambiguous.
4 not? It wasn't discretionary. You guys said, 4 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
5 stop, don't do any work; isn't that true? 5 Q. So let's get back to our hole.
6 MR. STONE: 6 We have a hole. It's mandatory, is it
7 Objection. 7 not, for the Corps, pursuant to its own
8 A. That's true. 8 policies and procedures, to do something?
9 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 9 Let's start with that. With that hole.
10 Q. That's true. 10 MR. STONE:
11 A. That's true. 11 Objection.
12 Q. Okay. So it wasn't discretionary, it 12 A. Okay. You know, we're going in
13 was -- you came out there and you said, listen, 13 circles here.
14 man, that water's high, the potential for 14 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
15 destruction here is enormous, stop the work 15 Q. I know.
16 until the water goes down. Right? 16 A. I've got a hole. I don't know why I
17 A. Um -- 17 have a hole, I don't know where this hole is --
18 MR. STONE: 18 Q. Right.
19 Object to form. 19 A. -- and you're asking me very specific
20 A. That's not totally correct. 20 questions about the hole.
21 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 21 Q. Well --
22 Q. All right. 22 A. Okay? How did the hole get there?
23 A. Okay? Depending on the river stage, 23 Q. Somebody dug it.
24 there were certainly things that we permit 24 A. Okay, where is it?
25 based on river stage. 25 Q. They put a spade in the ground.
21 (Pages 78 to 81)
Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285
GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 82 Page 84
1 A. Well, where is it? 1 Q. Either way.
2 Q. Wait, wait. We've already established 2 A. Well, no, there's a big difference.
3 where it is. Mr. Grieshaber, wait. Hold the 3 Q. Well, then, we'll talk about each
4 phone. We've already established -- 4 difference then. I would like to talk because
5 A. Well, then, I apologize because I 5 I'm trying to understand what the parameters --
6 don't know where I am. 6 that's why I'm asking the questions.
7 MR. STONE: 7 What are the parameters, if any?
8 Let the witness speak and stop 8 That's why I didn't say what should you do, I
9 the argument. 9 said, do you have to do something? Okay?
10 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 10 So here's the question: You got the
11 Q. Let's go back -- 11 hole. Do you have to do something; yes or no?
12 MR. BRUNO: 12 MR. STONE:
13 There's no argument here, 13 I'm trying to give you all the
14 Mr. Stone. There's interruption by 14 leeway I can here, but --
15 you, but -- 15 MR. BRUNO:
16 MR. TREEBY: 16 You're going to give me all the
17 Objection to interrupting the 17 leeway that I am entitled to.
18 witness. 18 MR. STONE:
19 MR. BRUNO: 19 I absolutely will.
20 In fairness to me -- 20 MR. BRUNO:
21 MR. STONE: 21 You don't need to try anything.
22 You let the witness finish his 22 And don't try to hard because
23 statement. 23 something is going to break if you try
24 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 24 to hard.
25 Q. We've already establish where the hole 25 MR. STONE:
Page 83 Page 85
1 was, did we not? 1 I want you to understand, my
2 A. Okay. Are you saying the hole is on 2 absolute goal is to give you all the
3 the flood side of the IHNC? 3 leeway --
4 Q. I already said that. 4 MR. BRUNO:
5 A. Okay. I just want to make sue. 5 I don't really care about what
6 Q. Did I not? 6 you understand or don't understand or
7 A. I'm not sure I heard that, but I may 7 what you have to say or not say,
8 be wrong. 8 Richard. Okay? It's of no moment to
9 Q. Fine. We'll say it again. It's on 9 he.
10 flood side of the IHNC, it's within 300 feet. 10 MR. STONE:
11 A. So there is a hole 300 feet on the 11 I realize that.
12 flood side of the IHNC. 12 MR. BRUNO:
13 Q. No, there's a hole within 300 feet. I 13 We have a record, and you can
14 said that two or three times, and this is the 14 make your objections all day long.
15 fourth time. So there's a hole within 300 feet 15 And if you want to adjourn, we'll take
16 on the flood side of the IHNC. 16 this to the courtroom because that's
17 A. Of the IHNC. 17 the only place I'm going to be able to
18 Q. And we're talking about -- 18 get some answers, obviously.
19 A. Okay, and this -- let me finish 19 MR. STONE:
20 getting my boundaries here, please. 20 I don't think the magistrate
21 Q. All right. 21 wants to hear from you anymore this
22 A. Okay. There is an ongoing 22 week. But anyway.
23 construction contract that caused this hole to 23 MR. BRUNO:
24 happen, or was this somebody that just came out 24 You know, I don't know about
25 and dug the hole? 25 that, Richard. How do we know? You
22 (Pages 82 to 85)
Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285
GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 86 Page 88
1 know the answer to that already? 1 Stop. Good.
2 MR. STONE: 2 Now, we're going to stay on this
3 I believe I do. 3 until it's done. Okay?
4 MR. BRUNO: 4 MR. STONE:
5 Oh, you do? Based on what? 5 Then I have a --
6 MR. STONE: 6 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
7 Based on where you've been all 7 Q. Now, this United States Army Corps of
8 week and the things you've been doing 8 Engineers is already on record. You're on
9 here. 9 record. If you have a hole near a flood
10 MR. BRUNO: 10 control structure, it merits evaluation. Okay?
11 What are you talking about? 11 You've already told me that.
12 MR. STONE: 12 A. That's correct.
13 You clearly do not understand 13 Q. Now, I'm trying to get a sense of the
14 what a 30(b)(6) deposition is. 14 importance of that, whether it's something that
15 MR. BRUNO: 15 is mandatory, discretionary or something that
16 Richard, don't you dare. Don't 16 they can ignore. I think we've established so
17 you dare lecture me about how to 17 far it's not something that you guys ignore.
18 practice law. You of all people who 18 A. Correct.
19 are on record telling all of us that 19 Q. And it's not discretionary, it's
20 when Mr. Varuso gave his first 20 mandatory that you do something. Right?
21 30(b)(6) deposition he did it to your 21 A. Correct.
22 script. Of all people to tell me how 22 MR. STONE:
23 to practice law, it ain't you. Okay? 23 Objection.
24 MR. STONE: 24 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
25 So you're going to attack me now, 25 Q. Now, you've already told me, though,
Page 87 Page 89
1 right? 1 that if it's on ongoing construction project
2 MR. BRUNO: 2 that might get you in one direction, if it's
3 You just attacked me, Richard. 3 just some guy out there digging a hole that
4 So you know, when you throw stuff on 4 might got you someplace else. Right?
5 this side of the table it's going to 5 A. Correct.
6 come back at you twice as hard. 6 Q. You need more information.
7 MR. STONE: 7 A. Correct.
8 Ask the questions from this set 8 Q. All right. That's where I am. So the
9 of -- 9 Corps needs to ask some questions. Right?
10 MR. BRUNO: 10 A. Correct.
11 Richard, don't lecture me. 11 Q. Okay. So if it's an ongoing
12 Richard, enough already. Stop. 12 construction contract, let's assume that
13 MR. STONE: 13 they've asked that question. All right, guys,
14 You've got a set of parameters 14 this is an ongoing construction contract. What
15 here. 15 does the Corps do next?
16 MR. BRUNO: 16 A. Okay. Is it an ongoing construction
17 Stop. 17 contract that the hole was intended to be part
18 MR. STONE: 18 of?
19 Your parameters here-- 19 Q. Yes.
20 MR. BRUNO: 20 A. All right. So this was a designed
21 Stop, Richard. Stop. Stop. You 21 hole.
22 finished? Just stop. 22 Q. Yes?
23 MR. STONE: 23 A. In other words -- so then the Corps of
24 I object. 24 Engineers designed that hole.
25 MR. BRUNO: 25 Q. No.
23 (Pages 86 to 89)
Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285
GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 90 Page 92
1 A. Well, I'm asking. 1 Q. All right. Do you have to know
2 Q. They didn't. 2 something about the stratification?
3 A. Okay. So it's not a de -- it wasn't 3 A. The stratification exists because I
4 designed by the Corps of Engineers. 4 have a design right there. So I go --
5 Q. No, it was not. 5 Q. Wait. Wait. I'm sorry. Forgive me.
6 A. Okay. Was the excavation of that hole 6 So you're telling me that the design documents
7 done as part of the contract and had to be 7 will give you the stratification.
8 submitted to the Corps of Engineers? 8 A. That's correct.
9 Q. Yes. 9 Q. And that's the guy that did the
10 A. Okay. So if it was submitted to the 10 designing, not you. Because it's on a piece of
11 Corps of Engineers, the Corps of Engineers 11 paper.
12 looked over that submittal to make sure that 12 A. Wait. I'm saying the design for the
13 hole had no impact on the floodwall. 13 wall.
14 Q. Okay. Got you. So if the contractor 14 Q. No. The hole. We're talking about
15 designed the specifications, the Corps 15 the hole.
16 evaluated those specifications, and you're here 16 A. You asked me how would I go about
17 to testify today as the representative of the 17 designing -- checking the impact of the hole on
18 United States Army Corps of Engineers that the 18 the flood protection.
19 Corps would have done an evaluation of that 19 Q. Right.
20 hole, right? 20 A. Okay.
21 A. I'm saying if it was a required 21 Q. So you've got -- because you've got
22 submittal -- 22 the plans from the contractor you know how deep
23 Q. Yes. 23 the hole is going to be.
24 A. -- the Corps reviewed the impact of 24 A. Correct.
25 that hole on flood protection. 25 Q. All right. And then in order to get
Page 91 Page 93
1 Q. Okay. Fair. Now, good. 1 information about the stratification, I think
2 What would the Corps have done to 2 what you're telling me is you don't rely on the
3 review the impact? You talked before about a 3 contractor, you've got that already in your
4 bunch of stuff, stratification, depth of the 4 plans and specifications for the floodwall.
5 hole, height of the -- tell me in detail what 5 A. Correct.
6 the Corps would have done. 6 Q. So you go look at that.
7 A. The Corps would have looked at the 7 A. Correct.
8 impact of that hole -- 8 Q. Fair enough. What do you do next?
9 Q. All right. 9 A. I take the difference between the
10 A. -- on the design of that floodwall. 10 ground line that was assumed in the plans and
11 Q. All right. How did they do that? 11 specifications for the design of the wall and
12 A. They looked into the change of the 12 modify it to the new ground line that results
13 boundary conditions around the wall that the 13 of having excavated the hole.
14 excavation caused and saw that -- and checked 14 Q. Please, you'll have to explain what is
15 to see whether or not it impacted the required 15 a ground line?
16 factor of safety. 16 A. The cross-section, the ground on each
17 Q. How did they do that? Tell me the 17 side -- the ground on each side of the wall.
18 process by which they do that. 18 Q. The floodwall.
19 A. Okay. You go in and you re run the 19 A. On the floodwall. The floodwall sits
20 loading on the sheet pile. 20 on an embankment.
21 Q. Wait. Forgive me. I'm writing this 21 Q. All right. Why don't you draw it for
22 down. Before you re run, don't you need some 22 me.
23 information, like how deep the hole is? 23 (Brief recess.)
24 A. Well, I assume I have all that 24 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
25 information in the submittal. 25 Q. All right. We're back on the record
24 (Pages 90 to 93)
Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285
GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 94 Page 96
1 now, and you've done this drawing. By the way, 1 it to see that it is stable. And in this case,
2 I've marked it as P Exhibit 5. 2 you want to make sure that it is not going to
3 (Exhibit 5 was marked for 3 rotate into this hole.
4 identification and is attached hereto.) 4 Q. Okay.
5 A. Okay. What we have here is the black 5 A. Okay?
6 line is the assumed ground line configuration 6 Q. And finally, the seepage?
7 with the wall in place on the flood side. 7 A. As far as seepage, we would run the
8 Q. Right. 8 Lane's Weighted Creep Ratio --
9 A. Okay. We assume this pink is where 9 Q. L-A --
10 you excavated a hole. We would -- the original 10 A. L-A-N-E.
11 design assumed this ground line. 11 Q. Okay.
12 The new design that you would go 12 A. Weighted Creep Ratio.
13 revisit would be the exact same analysis, the 13 Q. Weighted Creep Ratio. Okay.
14 same methodology of analysis, the same 14 A. And check to make sure we still have
15 stratifications, and you would just assume that 15 an adequate factor of safety for seepage.
16 you only had this much material. 16 Q. Okay. Fine. I'm going to ask you to
17 Q. The pink line. 17 just accept that I'm reading this accurately.
18 A. The pink line. And you would run to 18 And if there is any concern that I'm not we'll
19 verify that you have not impacted the design 19 just pull it out of all these piles of paper.
20 factor of safety. 20 But the Engineering Manual Number 1110-2-2502,
21 Q. Okay. And so just walk me through the 21 entitled Retaining and Floodwalls, USACE, 1989,
22 process. You've -- now we have got our line, 22 General Considerations: Water retaining
23 we have got our stratification. How do you 23 structures are subject to through seepage,
24 determine whether or not there's no impact on 24 underseepage and seepage around their sides or
25 the structure? Is there some formula or some 25 ends. Seepage control is a primary
Page 95 Page 97
1 test or some -- 1 consideration for floodwall design.
2 A. No, you would run the exact same 2 Uncontrolled seepage may result in water
3 designs that you spoke of earlier, those three 3 pressures and uplift forces on the wall base in
4 designs. You'd do wall stability -- 4 excess of design assumptions and consequent
5 Q. Wall stability. Okay. 5 structural instability. Seepage control
6 A. And you would check seepage -- 6 entails the design of measures to ensure that
7 Q. Seepage. 7 seepage pressures and velocities are maintained
8 A. And you would check global stability. 8 below tolerable values. Okay? As floodwalls
9 Q. I'm sorry? 9 are usually found on alluvial materials,
10 A. Global stability. 10 pervious zones of significant thickness are
11 Q. Global stability. All right. 11 often present at some depth below relatively
12 And would you walk me through the 12 impervious top stratum materials and may be
13 process of evaluating wall stability. What do 13 hydraulically connected. Because of horizontal
14 you do? 14 stratification of alluvial deposits, horizontal
15 A. Wall stability, basically you take -- 15 permeability may be greatly in excess of the
16 you really don't want to hear this -- the 16 vertical permeability. Underseepage control
17 active and passive pressures, you get a net 17 measures vary because the selection and design
18 pressure diagram -- you know, suffice to say 18 of appropriate control scheme is highly
19 that you take all the loads that are on the 19 dependent on site specific conditions,
20 wall and you make sure that the wall does not 20 particularly the stratification and
21 rotate, that it doesn't lose its integrity and 21 permeability of foundation materials,
22 it stays -- stays exactly where you want it. 22 availability of right-of-way or and local
23 Q. Okay. 23 construction practices and costs.
24 A. Okay? As far as global stability, you 24 Are you familiar with that design
25 look at the overall embankment with the wall in 25 consideration?
25 (Pages 94 to 97)
Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285
GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 98 Page 100
1 A. I'm familiar with the design 1 Q. Well, if they apply, though -- do we
2 consideration. I'm not sure that I'm familiar 2 agree they apply?
3 with those exact verbiage. 3 A. To a certain extent, but let's go
4 Q. Okay. All right. Does the Corps -- 4 through them.
5 well, perhaps we should pull it out, then, if 5 Q. Well, that's right. So let's see what
6 you -- let's get it out. 6 doesn't apply. So my question to you is this,
7 Let me see if I can ask you this 7 and that is, we now know what the floodwall
8 question: 8 looks like at the Lower Nine, we've got a
9 A. You see, you're talking about I-walls, 9 document Plaintiffs' Exhibit 3.
10 and I don't think that manual is about I-walls. 10 A. Okay.
11 I think that's floodwalls and retaining walls. 11 Q. Is there the potential for
12 Q. Which one? 12 underseepage at that location?
13 A. Does that also address I-walls? 13 A. Um -- based on stratification, there's
14 Q. Let's see. It says retaining and 14 a potential for some of the organics to give up
15 floodwalls. 15 water. Not classical underseepage through
16 A. Yeah. 16 aquifers.
17 Q. There it is. 17 Q. All right. And when you say some of
18 A. I know, but what happens is -- is 18 the organics, you're referring to that marsh or
19 there a separate section in here on I-walls? 19 peat layer?
20 Q. You're the expert. 20 A. Right, the organic stratification.
21 A. That's why I'm asking. 21 Q. In fact, there is a marsh and a peat
22 Q. Because you're the expert? 22 layer, isn't there?
23 A. These are gravity concrete walls, 23 A. Yeah. Both of them lumped together is
24 cantilevered reinforced concrete walls, 24 what I'm referring to as the organic
25 alternative types of designs -- see, if you 25 stratification.
Page 99 Page 101
1 notice, you don't see any I-walls in here. 1 Q. All right. And so there's the
2 Q. All right. 2 potential that water could pass through that
3 A. This manual doesn't apply to I-walls. 3 layer.
4 Q. Doesn't apply to I-walls is what 4 A. That's correct.
5 you're telling me. Okay. 5 Q. All right. Now, let's see. It says,
6 A. Yes. I'm not saying that design 6 uncontrolled seepage may result in water
7 concept doesn't apply to I-walls, but you're 7 pressures and uplift forces on the wall base in
8 quoting me a manual that doesn't apply to 8 excess of the design assumptions and consequent
9 I-walls. 9 structural instability. All right. Is that a
10 Q. Okay. That's fine. Let me see if we 10 potential issue at the Lower Nine in a
11 can work through that. 11 hurricane situation, that is, the water is real
12 We have a floodwall which has got a 12 high?
13 -8 foot sheet pile tip, right? 13 A. The only way that becomes an issue is
14 A. Okay. 14 if the wall itself deflects and a crack forms
15 Q. And let's see if we can understand 15 at the interface of the wall and the embankment
16 whether or not principles apply. 16 which would short-circuit and put that excess
17 Is the I-wall at the Lower Nine -- I 17 pressure into the organic stratas.
18 hope I don't have to be more specific than 18 Q. Okay. I got you. How about if you
19 that -- is that possibly subject to 19 had a hole next to the wall backfilled with
20 underseepage, just generally? 20 sand that punctured this marsh layer; is it
21 A. No, I agree that all those things 21 possible that that could be a route through
22 apply to the wall analysis. 22 which water could travel because of the high
23 Q. Okay. 23 water caused by the hurricane could create
24 A. What I'm saying is you are pulling it 24 these high pressures and force that water down
25 out of a manual that doesn't address I-walls. 25 into the hole and then through that marsh
26 (Pages 98 to 101)
Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285
GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 102 Page 104
1 layer? Is that a possibility? 1 underseepage? Have you done that evaluation?
2 MR. STONE: 2 A. I personally have not done that
3 Object to form. 3 evaluation, but there's a tremendous amount of
4 A. It's probably not. The methodology 4 evaluation that was done post-Katrina to modes
5 that you're describing has eliminated the fact 5 of failure, a lot of it documented in the IPET
6 that for that drop of water to go through the 6 report --
7 tortuous path of going through the sands to get 7 Q. All right.
8 to that organic, it's going to have lost a lot 8 A. -- that spoke to the mode of failure,
9 of its head. And so it's highly unlikely that 9 and the only way you could get that kind of
10 you could come up with a scenario that you 10 excess seepage would be if a crack analysis --
11 would have enough pressure to cause a problem. 11 if a crack had formed and actually injected the
12 The crack analysis allowed for the 12 full head at the tip.
13 wall itself to have completely moved away from 13 Q. All right. Well, but the bottom line
14 the foundation, so the full impact of that 14 is the Corps of engineers did not conduct such
15 elevation ten, eleven, whatever it was, was 15 an analysis, right?
16 felt inside that organic strata. 16 A. Did not conduct such analysis at what
17 Q. All right. Now, what you just said, 17 point?
18 that it's impossible, I guess then that the 18 Q. At any point.
19 Corps of Engineers -- 19 A. We did not do the crack analysis.
20 A. I didn't say the word impossible. 20 Q. You didn't do the analysis of a hole
21 Q. Oh. Okay. Unlikely? 21 either, did you? Of a 25-foot hole on --
22 THE WITNESS: 22 A. I don't -- I'm not saying that. If
23 Would you tell me what I said? 23 that hole was there and we evaluated the, um --
24 THE REPORTER: 24 the backfill of that hole, I mean, we're
25 "It's highly unlikely." 25 talking about a hole that's backfilled, right?
Page 103 Page 105
1 A. Okay. 1 Q. Uh-huh. We sure are.
2 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 2 A. Okay. So it's -- the analysis is
3 Q. Okay. I guess, then, that the Corps 3 fairly simplistic.
4 did do an analysis in order to determine that 4 Q. Well, I know, but one of the subjects
5 that kind of thing could not have happened. 5 that you've been designated specifically to
6 Right? Y'all did that analysis. You evaluated 6 talk about is Paragraph Number 31, which is the
7 the hole, or the -- 7 analysis of geologic cross-sections of the East
8 A. With its backfill. 8 Bank Industrial Area relative to the TERC,
9 Q. All right. With its backfill. You 9 including those areas adjacent to both the
10 did that in the context of the east bank area. 10 north and south breach sites of the EBIA
11 You did that, didn't you? 11 floodwall. So you're the guy --
12 A. I didn't personally do it. I would 12 A. Okay. The analysis of the geologic
13 assume that's part of the process of design and 13 cross-section. Bring me the cross-section.
14 it was done. 14 I'll analyze it for you.
15 Q. All right. Your assumption is that it 15 Q. No. You're supposed to be able to
16 was done. Do you know whether it was done in 16 tell me whether you did one or not. I don't
17 fact? 17 have to bring anything.
18 A. No, I don't know. 18 A. The geologic profile it says.
19 Q. Okay. All right. Well, have you done 19 Q. Geologic cross-sections.
20 the necessary study or evaluation in order to 20 A. Right. Bring the geologic
21 tell us today whether or not, if you have a 21 cross-section and I'll --
22 hole and it goes -- it's backfilled with sand 22 Q. You want me to bring that to you.
23 and it cuts through this marsh layer that it's 23 A. No. I mean, that's what you're
24 likely or unlikely or impossible or whatever 24 talking about is the geologic crossing. You're
25 that that might provide a route for 25 not talking about a hole. I'm not trying to be
27 (Pages 102 to 105)
Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285
GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 106 Page 108
1 argumentative, and I apologize. 1 International?
2 MR. STONE: 2 A. That was a remediation job of removing
3 Just relax. 3 HTRW type stuff that had to be taken care of
4 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 4 prior to any kind of dredging.
5 Q. That's fine. All I want to know is 5 Q. Okay. Would you characterize the work
6 whether or not you know in fact whether the 6 done by WGI as only remediation, or was there a
7 Corps analyzed any holes that were dug and 7 component of demolition?
8 backfilled on the water side of the Lower Nine 8 A. They were taking down structures, too,
9 levee before Hurricane Katrina. If you did the 9 from what I remember.
10 analysis, fine. If you didn't do the analysis, 10 Q. All right. So while certainly they
11 fine. It's one way or the other. 11 were hired to do removal of toxins, the WGI was
12 A. Oh, if you want to know if I did the 12 also hired to do demolition, right?
13 analysis, no, I did not do the analysis. 13 A. To my recollection, yes.
14 Q. No, you're not you anymore, you're the 14 Q. Okay.
15 Corps. You're the Corps. 15 MR. STONE:
16 A. I'm willing to assume that that 16 Just note for the record the
17 analysis was done because that is our process 17 document is highlighted. I don't know
18 and procedure, to revisit the design. 18 if that has any significance here.
19 Q. All right. Would you agree that the 19 Did you have a question on that
20 Lower Nine floodwall is built on alluvial 20 document, Joe?
21 materials? 21 MR. BRUNO:
22 A. Yes. 22 Yes. The witness is still
23 Q. Would you agree that there are 23 looking at it.
24 pervious zones of significant thickness present 24 A. Okay. I know enough to be dangerous.
25 at some depth below the Lower Nine floodwalls? 25 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
Page 107 Page 109
1 A. There are organic zones which can be 1 Q. Thank you, sir. Have you ever seen
2 pervious. They can transmit water. But those 2 this document?
3 pervious zones that they're referring to in 3 A. I may have. I don't really remember.
4 that document are open work materials, sands, 4 Q. All right. It's Plaintiffs' Exhibit
5 gravel, sand/clay gravel type stuff, aquifer 5 Number 6.
6 type materials. 6 (Exhibit 6 was marked for
7 Q. All right. 7 identification and is attached hereto.)
8 A. That I would -- 8 MR. TREEBY:
9 Q. Do you have any understanding of the 9 Go ahead and put the Bates number
10 work that was done in connection with the 10 if you would, Joe.
11 preparation for the east bank industrial site 11 MR. BRUNO:
12 for dredging? 12 Yeah. WGI 56789 are the numbers.
13 MR. STONE: 13 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
14 Objection. Vague. 14 Q. Now it says here that the contractor
15 A. I guess I don't understand the 15 shall furnish all engineering services,
16 question. I'm aware that that was going to be 16 materials, supplies, labor as required in
17 the location of the bypass channel. 17 connection with technical review site
18 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 18 documents, et cetera, et cetera. So WGI was
19 Q. Right. 19 supposed to prepare all the plans and
20 A. I'm aware that were HTRW issues that 20 specifications and they would be submitted to
21 had to be taken care of before that can be set 21 the Corps of Engineers.
22 up so it could be dredged out as a bypass 22 A. (Nods affirmatively.)
23 channel. 23 Q. Did your department evaluates any
24 Q. All right. And the -- you're aware of 24 plans and specifications submitted by WGI to
25 the work that was done by the Washington Group 25 the Corps in connection with this TERC or Task
28 (Pages 106 to 109)
Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285
GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 110 Page 112
1 Order No. 26? 1 this deposition is about the damned
2 MR. STONE: 2 east bank industrial site.
3 Objection. It's outside of the 3 Is this a surprise to you or
4 scope of the 30(b)(6) request. 4 something? Maybe I'm shocked.
5 A. I don't really remember if they did or 5 MR. STONE:
6 not. It would have gone through engineering 6 I also object to all the
7 division. And any aspect of it that was 7 commentary. It costs us all a lot of
8 geotechnical in nature would have gone through 8 money.
9 the geotechnical branch. 9 MR. BRUNO:
10 But, you know, whether or not, you 10 It's costing us a lot more money,
11 know, there's a submittal register that shows 11 you know, since you've flooded our
12 that it came through engineering division into 12 city and caused us billions of dollars
13 geotech, I do not know. 13 in damage. So don't talk about money.
14 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 14 A. This is just additional work that's to
15 Q. I'm going to show you Plaintiff's 15 the task order, I assume.
16 Exhibit 7 which is WGI 54419 in seriatim to 16 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
17 54433. (Tendering.) 17 Q. Right. And to help you out, it's the
18 (Exhibit 7 was marked for 18 one that regards the removal of the concrete
19 identification and is attached hereto.) 19 structures at the Boland Marine site, and it
20 A. Okay. 20 gets us to the hole.
21 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 21 A. Okay.
22 Q. All right. First of all, so we can 22 Q. I just wanted to give you some
23 get some context here, this is statement of 23 context, you know, so you'll know where I'm
24 work for the excavation and disposal of 24 coming from. That's all.
25 additional subsurface foundations. Okay? It's 25 A. Got it.
Page 111 Page 113
1 Plaintiffs' Exhibit Number 7. 1 Q. Okay. So specifically, at Page --
2 Do you know what it is that the 2 there's Bates numbered Page 54420, Subparagraph
3 contractor is supposed to do by virtue of one 3 3.1 says, subsequent to the award of
4 of these kinds of documents? 4 modifications, the contractor discovered
5 A. Well, I see it's a mod to -- to 5 additional eight unknown subsurface concrete
6 something, an existing task order or a 6 and steel foundations beneath the existing
7 contract. 7 building slab at the Boland Marine site during
8 Q. Right. 8 building and slab demolition operations. Okay?
9 A. So it's a statement of work to 9 A. (Nods affirmatively.)
10 whatever the modification is. 10 Q. These items were left behind by the
11 Q. All right. But with regard to the 11 port's former industrial marine tenants and
12 preparation of specifications, do you have any 12 were unknown due to the absence of any as-built
13 knowledge of what it is, what the Corps expects 13 drawings. Anecdotal remarks from a former
14 the contractor to do and what the Corps is 14 Boland Marine employee suggests that some of
15 supposed to do? 15 the foundations may have served as the
16 A. I'd have to read it a lot more 16 foundation of a former three-legged tower
17 closely. 17 crane. The mass concrete and steel foundations
18 MR. STONE: 18 are assumed to be reinforced with rebar and
19 And objection here that it's not 19 pile founded on treated wood piling assumed to
20 within the scope of this -- 20 be 30 to 35 feet long. All concrete, steel and
21 MR. BRUNO: 21 pilings shall be removed in their entirety and
22 It is within the scope. I can't 22 disposed of off site at appropriate disposal
23 ask the next question without getting 23 facilities and material recyclers. Salvage
24 some context. I don't know how in the 24 value of any recycled steel or rebar shall be
25 heck you expect -- as if don't know 25 credited to WGI or its subcontractor to defray
29 (Pages 110 to 113)
Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285
GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 114 Page 116
1 the cost of this work. See Enclosure 1, 1 the flood protection?
2 original photos and sketch for more 2 MR. STONE:
3 information. And these are lousy pictures, I 3 You're showing him Exhibit 8?
4 apologize, but we've got some bad pictures to 4 MR. BRUNO:
5 look at. 5 Yes, I am.
6 A. Okay. No problem. I've got the gist. 6 A. Okay. That was what I just looked at?
7 Q. Okay. And I believe it's been 7 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
8 referred to as the wedding cake structure. 8 Q. Yeah.
9 Now, do you have any knowledge of this 9 A. We would look at the RFP -- if that is
10 work -- 10 the only form of the submittal -- I mean, I
11 A. No. 11 don't know if there was a secondary submittal
12 Q. -- done by WGI. 12 of exactly what they were doing, because they
13 A. I knew that we had to go back out 13 show the braced cofferdam and stuff in these
14 because they found some things that weren't 14 drawings.
15 initially -- but as far as knowing them 15 Q. Right.
16 individually as the wedding cake or anything 16 A. You know, I'm not sure if there was
17 like that, no. 17 another package of paper that was a little more
18 Q. Fair enough. Fair enough. But in the 18 definitive. But we would take whatever the
19 context of this business of evaluating the 19 plan is and look at it.
20 holes -- 20 Q. Okay.
21 A. Okay. 21 A. I mean, I didn't read the whole thing.
22 Q. -- this is where I'm going here, just 22 It looked like -- it seemed like there ought to
23 to get background so we can connect the dots to 23 have been more to it.
24 where we are. 24 Q. Well, there's not.
25 A. Okay. 25 A. Because you've got those drawings.
Page 115 Page 117
1 Q. So this thing says, go out, 1 Q. All right. Well, at the very least,
2 Mr. Contractor, and come back to me with a set 2 can you find anything in this document which
3 of plans and specifications for the removal of 3 would seem to reflect that anybody did an
4 these things. Right? 4 evaluation of the holes: And I'm referring
5 A. (Nods affirmatively.) 5 specifically to Page 3. It says, with
6 Q. Now, and that comes back in the form 6 regard -- I'm going to read it for the record
7 of a proposal which is Exhibit 8. Take a look 7 if you don't mind. Paragraph 6. First of all,
8 at that. (Tendering.) 8 it says, an excavation plan and activity hazard
9 And it's accompanied by drawings, 9 analysis, AHA, shall be developed by the
10 Number 9. 10 selected subcontractor and submitted prior to
11 (Exhibit 8 was marked for 11 initiation of the work. All elevation
12 identification and is attached hereto.) 12 measurements are to be made from mean sea
13 (Exhibit 9 was marked for 13 level.
14 identification and is attached hereto.) 14 Then it says, with regard to the
15 MR. BRUNO: 15 eighth block, the large block, upon reaching
16 I'll give you the Bates number in 16 -25 feet excavation depth, a decision by WGINT
17 a second, Bill, when he's finished 17 and the USACE shall be made to continue
18 looking at them. 18 excavation or quit.
19 A. I've got the flavor of it. I didn't 19 Okay. So this indicates at least that
20 read all the words. 20 somebody is digging a how to 25 feet. All
21 Q. Sure. And what I'm trying to get at 21 right?
22 is, so then this comes back to the Corps in 22 A. Okay.
23 response to the statement of work. And is this 23 Q. If there would have been some kind of
24 the document that the Corps evaluates to 24 an evaluation of this hole, what would it have
25 determine whether or not there is an impact on 25 looked like? Because I can't find it.
30 (Pages 114 to 117)
Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285
GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 118 Page 120
1 A. Well, you're saying -- basically, what 1 in the contract, that, you know, this is the
2 you just read, that they were going to submit a 2 minimum control line, you can do what you need
3 plan -- um -- you know, what paragraph -- 3 to do as long as you stay outside the minimum
4 Q. They were going to evaluate the 4 control line.
5 subcontractor's plan for an action hazards 5 If you're going to violate the minimum
6 analysis. 6 control line you would have to come in and look
7 A. Someplace you read something about -- 7 at specific things.
8 hear it is. With regard to the eighth block -- 8 Q. I got you now. But let's talk about
9 Q. Right. 9 that for a moment, if I may. Okay?
10 A. -- upon reaching -25. 10 A. Okay.
11 Q. Right. You decided to go lower, I 11 Q. So that would mean that somebody did
12 think it is what it says. Or decide what they 12 an evaluation to draw that line. Right?
13 were going to do when it got that deep. 13 A. Correct.
14 A. Okay. So the question is? 14 Q. Okay. It would also mean that at the
15 Q. Okay. Let's break it down. That 15 time that line was drawn that the person knew
16 indicates somebody is digging a hole -- 16 how deep the holes might get. Right?
17 A. Correct. 17 A. No.
18 Q. -- within 300 feet of a floodwall, 18 Q. No?
19 right? 19 A. What happens is, he goes to the
20 A. That's correct. 20 allowable factor of safety, and he figures out
21 Q. Okay. Now, and you've already told me 21 what ground line would maintain the allowable
22 that the Corps needs to do something in 22 factor of safety. If the activity does not
23 connection with the evaluation of whether or 23 violate that minimum ground line --
24 not that may or may not have any impact on the 24 Q. Oh. I see what you're saying. Ground
25 flood control walls. 25 line, you mean depth.
Page 119 Page 121
1 A. Okay. 1 A. Right.
2 Q. And you've told me that the things 2 Q. I have to tell you, I was thinking
3 that would be done would include wall 3 distance from the wall?
4 stability, seepage analysis, global stability 4 A. No. No. The ground.
5 and the like. Okay. Now I'm just trying to 5 Q. All right. Because there is, in
6 learn from you if that was done by somebody 6 fairness to you, some reference as to a line,
7 would there be a piece of paper that would have 7 but it's not depth, it's within 15 feet of the
8 reflected that it was done? In this office. 8 center line of the flood control wall.
9 A. I believe that there's two ways to 9 A. Okay.
10 look at it. There's the possibility that there 10 Q. Okay? But that's not what you're
11 was an overall design done that allowed -- that 11 talking about, you're talking about a depth.
12 would allow for saying as long as you stayed so 12 A. Well, what I'm talking about is, if
13 many feet away you could go so deep, it's 13 you look at this profile right here on the
14 called a minimum control line, where we would 14 flood side?
15 say do not violate this line and you can do 15 Q. Sure.
16 whatever you want in there and it will not 16 A. Okay, we could have very well have
17 impact the flood protection. Okay? Now -- 17 said, you know what? As long as you stay above
18 Q. And that would be in the form of? 18 that blue line it's not a problem.
19 A. That would have been done in 19 Q. Got you. All right.
20 geotechnical, it would have been -- you know, 20 A. And that would have answered a whole
21 it would have been forwarded through the chief 21 lot of cross-correspondence.
22 of engineering division, through the chief of 22 Q. Makes sense.
23 construction division. 23 MR. TREEBY:
24 Q. Okay. 24 Joe, is that an exhibit, that
25 A. You know, it would have been early on 25 drawing he did?
31 (Pages 118 to 121)
Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285
GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 122 Page 124
1 MR. BRUNO: 1 some math, some calculations, some something
2 Yes. 2 that reflect that it occurred, right?
3 MR. TREEBY: 3 A. I would assume it's in a file folder.
4 What's the number of it? 4 Q. Sure. Because good engineering and
5 MR. BRUNO: 5 sound engineering principles require that you
6 5. 6 document those kind of analyses. Right?
7 MR. TREEBY: 7 A. Correct.
8 Thank you. 8 Q. Okay. Now, let's assume -- because
9 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 9 again I can't find such a document or such a
10 Q. And perhaps the record should reflect 10 line.
11 you just added a line to this exhibit and it's 11 A. Okay.
12 a blue line in pen. 12 Q. So let's -- we've talked about that,
13 A. Right. 13 let's talk about the next possibility.
14 Q. Okay. But let's -- 14 All right. Now, what would I look for
15 A. And nothing is to scale. 15 to see if the Corps did some evaluation of the
16 Q. Oh, I know that. No one was holding 16 hole that they're talking about on this Exhibit
17 you to scale. 17 Number 8, if there is no, what did you call it,
18 A. Okay. 18 ground line --
19 Q. But in terms of this line thing, okay? 19 A. Minimum control line.
20 I want to make sure that the record is crystal 20 Q. If there is no minimum control line,
21 clear that you're not talking about a distance 21 what document should I look for to ascertain
22 from the wall, you're talking about a depth. 22 what evaluations the Corps did of that Boland
23 A. I'm talking about -- it's both depth 23 Marine hole?
24 and distance from the wall. In other words, 24 A. Wait. Of --
25 you would come some distance out -- 25 Q. This 25-foot hole.
Page 123 Page 125
1 Q. Right. 1 A. Just the 25-foot hole?
2 A. -- for a certain depth. 2 Q. Let's make it easy. That one hole.
3 Q. Okay. 3 A. I guess I would -- you know, if I had
4 A. So it defines whatever that line is. 4 to look, I would look in the contract file to
5 Q. Sure. And that's logical, 5 see if there is correspondence back and forth
6 Mr. Grieshaber, because essentially what the 6 between the chief of engineering division and
7 Corps would have done is the Corps would have 7 the chief of construction division. If it's
8 had some sense of how deep these holes might 8 not in the transmittal, you know, everything
9 get, because they know it's an ongoing 9 that goes back and forth between the
10 construction site. Right? 10 contractors and the --
11 A. Uh-huh. 11 Q. Fair enough.
12 Q. And they would have done their wall 12 A. You know, there's a couple of places
13 stability analysis, their seepage analysis, and 13 to look, but it seems like it would be in the
14 their global stability analysis, assuming the 14 contract file.
15 worst case scenario, and then thereby they can 15 Q. All right. Now, if is not in the
16 draw this line. Right. Okay. 16 contract file, can we conclude it didn't
17 A. Correct. 17 happen?
18 Q. You're shaking your head. You need to 18 MR. STONE:
19 say yes. 19 Objection. Witness may not
20 A. Correct. 20 have --
21 Q. And that piece of information should 21 A. I wouldn't. I mean, I'm not -- you
22 be written down somewhere, right? 22 know, I'm not saying that the contract files
23 A. I would assume it is. 23 are perfect. Um -- I mean, you could check in
24 Q. All right. And then there should also 24 the -- into the geotechnical branch to see if
25 be some documents that reflect that evaluation, 25 there was documentation in the geotechnical
32 (Pages 122 to 125)
Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285
GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 126 Page 128
1 branch. 1 borrow material?
2 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 2 A. That is material that they mine from
3 Q. Okay. 3 someplace and bring it in to backfill the hole.
4 A. Um -- you know, there's a myriad of 4 Q. All right. Now, you -- as I
5 ways that it could have been transmitted. 5 understand it -- I'm not an engineer, but as I
6 Q. All right. That's fine. 6 understand there's a variety of descriptors for
7 You say it could have been 7 soils and in particular the types of soils and
8 transmitted. From whom to whom would it have 8 materials you would use for backfill. Is that
9 been transmitted if the evaluation had been 9 true?
10 conducted? 10 A. You could use a myriad of, um -- of
11 A. Okay. That's a multiple question 11 materials for backfill. You could use anything
12 here. It would have gone from -- it could have 12 from open work material to a fat clay and
13 been Lee Guillory actually went to the chief of 13 everything in between.
14 geotechnical branch and asked a question. 14 Q. This particular indication is for
15 Q. And you were there. You were the 15 anything, any type of thing, all of those
16 chief. 16 things you just said, right?
17 A. No. I was the section chief. 17 A. Correct.
18 Depending on how the question came into 18 Q. I mean, there's no limit on what you
19 engineering division, you know, the records 19 could use to backfill here.
20 would be -- at that point, it would just be Lee 20 A. Right. You're just backfilling.
21 Guillory 's records and the geotechnical branch 21 Q. Just backfilling. And there is no
22 records. If, in fact, it went through a 22 real limitation on compaction either, is there?
23 transmittal process as a formal transmittal, 23 A. No.
24 there's a process for that. Um -- you know, 24 Q. There's no specification for
25 there's a process where if the chief of 25 compaction.
Page 127 Page 129
1 engineering division received a request from 1 A. There's no specifications for
2 the chief of construction to look at something, 2 compaction.
3 then that would be in the chief's reading 3 Q. So the contractor could have compacted
4 files. 4 it more if they wanted to, right? Is that
5 Q. Okay. Is the chief of construction a 5 right?
6 guy who would have the requisite knowledge and 6 A. Correct.
7 experience to do such an evaluation? 7 Q. The contractor could have used clay if
8 A. No. He would send it to the chief of 8 he want to, right?
9 engineering division. 9 A. That's correct.
10 Q. All right. It has to be done by 10 Q. All right. I know you have no, you
11 somebody in the engineering division. And in 11 know, familiarity with this particular
12 particular, does it have to be done by somebody 12 document, but if the Corps had approved this
13 in the geotechnical section? 13 proposal, do you know what that piece of paper
14 A. The geotechnical section would be part 14 would look like?
15 of it. There would also be somebody in the 15 A. Like I say, it would have come in as a
16 structures section would also look at it. 16 transmittal, it would have -- oh, you talking
17 Q. Okay. All right. Would you look at 17 about the Corps back to --
18 Number 7? It talks about the excavations 18 Q. WGI.
19 resulting from the removal and backfill. 19 A. -- Washington Group?
20 A. Okay. 20 Q. Yeah. Yeah.
21 Q. All right. It says, backfill with 21 A. That would be coming through Lee
22 borrow material obtained from either on-site 22 Guillory 's shop. Out of construction.
23 borrow source or off-site borrow source. 23 Q. I'll ask him. Not him. I'm doing a
24 A. Okay. 24 guy on Monday.
25 Q. Right? Now, what does that mean, 25 MR. STONE:
33 (Pages 126 to 129)
Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285
GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 130 Page 132
1 Lee Guillory Monday. 1 A. Were based upon which one?
2 A. That would be somebody from the 2 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
3 construction side of the house. 3 Q. I was just going to look at that and
4 (Off the record.) 4 to make sure that all the language is the same
5 MR. BRUNO: 5 for those paragraphs, and I think it is.
6 Plaintiffs' Exhibit Number 8 is 6 Let's look at Page 3.
7 WGI 57606 in seriatim to 57601, and 7 A. Okay. This is final and this is
8 the drawing which has been marked as 8 the --
9 Plaintiffs' Exhibit Number 9 is WGI 9 Q. That's the final and here's the
10 212862 in seriatim -- 10 proposal. And so I asked you questions about
11 MR. STONE: 11 4, 5, 6 and 7. Yeah. And you can see that
12 Did you say 606 to 601 for 12 they're the same.
13 Number 8? 13 A. Okay.
14 MR. BRUNO: 14 Q. Okay? All right.
15 Sorry. All right. Number 8 is 15 MR. SUTTON:
16 57606 to -- you're right. Maybe it's 16 Joe, can you tell us again
17 two documents. 614, and then it 17 Exhibit 9, the Bates range, the
18 switches to 615, and it goes back to 18 numbers?
19 92. All right. So I guess -- 19 MR. BRUNO:
20 All right. Well, I'm sorry then. 20 212862 to 212866.
21 P-8 are two documents. 21 MR. SUTTON:
22 MR. STONE: 22 All right.
23 Well, um -- Joe will just -- 23 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
24 MR. BRUNO: 24 Q. All right. Let's talk about the other
25 I'll mark them any way you want 25 hole. This is the south breach hole.
Page 131 Page 133
1 me to. 1 This is Plaintiffs' Exhibit Number 11,
2 MR. STONE: 2 WGI 36984 --
3 Leave it 8 since you've been 3 MR. SUTTON:
4 talking about it. And when Joe takes 4 Exhibit 10, Joe. Isn't it?
5 it back he will staple it together and 5 (Exhibit 10 was marked for
6 it will just be treated as one 6 identification and is attached hereto.)
7 exhibit, but we know on the record 7 MR. STONE:
8 that it's two different. 8 At the risk of causing problems I
9 MR. TREEBY: 9 object to the characterization of a
10 It would be nice to get the Bates 10 south breach hole, because I don't
11 ranges. 11 really know what you're talking about
12 MR. BRUNO: 12 and I don't think that's an accurate
13 I will. Let me just see if I can 13 statement.
14 figure it out. Here's when I've got. 14 MR. TREEBY:
15 Exhibit 8 is in fact the proposal. 15 I join the objection.
16 Okay? There are two documents, 16 MR. BRUNO:
17 because one of them is the original 17 Well, since it's not a question I
18 proposal and one of them is the final. 18 don't know what the point is.
19 The original is WGI 57592 to WGI 19 MR. STONE:
20 57601. Okay? And the thing that says 20 Well, the point is it's prefatory
21 final on it is WGI 057606 to 057615. 21 and I don't want it in the record as
22 Okay? 22 something that I just let go without
23 MR. STONE: 23 raising --
24 And the questions you asked the 24 MR. BRUNO:
25 witness were from the original. 25 That's fine. You can raise all
34 (Pages 130 to 133)
Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285
GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 134 Page 136
1 the sand you want to. 1 you know, structure.
2 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 2 You'll remember the document suggested
3 Q. What I am referencing is a hole which 3 that some of the piling were a certain length.
4 we allege was dug near the south breach. Okay? 4 Let's see if I can find it for you. Yeah. It
5 A. Okay. 5 says, at Page WGI 54420 --
6 Q. This hole is well documented in a 6 MR. STONE:
7 whole pile of pieces of paper that regard a 7 Which exhibit is that?
8 lift station removal. Okay? Exhibit 8 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
9 Plaintiffs' 10 is a series of documents and I'm 9 Q. -- of 7, it says that the mass
10 going to put them together just because it's 10 concrete and steel foundations are assumed to
11 better for that purpose, but the first document 11 be reinforced with rebar and pile founded on
12 is WGI 36984, the second document is something 12 treated wood pilings assumed to be 30 to
13 entitled Lift Station Removal Plan, As Revised, 13 35 feet long. So if you go down 25 feet and
14 October 10, 2001, and it's in seriatim to 27 14 that's the bottom of this concrete thing, then
15 then we have a transmittal -- 15 you're going down another 30, 35 feet,
16 MR. TREEBY: 16 possibly. Okay?
17 To 27? I'm sorry. Can you give 17 But for your purposes, first question
18 the Bates range? 18 is: If you have a series of piling, again in
19 MR. BRUNO: 19 this general area within 300 feet of our
20 Yeah. To 52127. That's the 20 floodwall -- all right? Is there any need to
21 ending Bates of that document. 21 evaluate what impact there may be to the
22 MR. SUTTON: 22 removal of these piling in that same location?
23 What's the starting range? 23 MR. STONE:
24 MR. BRUNO: 24 Object to form.
25 I'll try it one more time. 52123 25 MR. BRUNO:
Page 135 Page 137
1 to 27. 1 What's wrong with the form?
2 The next document is WGI 76655 2 MR. STONE:
3 and 54. 3 The hypothetical is incomplete
4 The next one is WGI 228430. 4 and misleading.
5 Next one is WGI 037475, 76, it's 5 MR. BRUNO:
6 two documents. 6 What's incomplete about it?
7 And then WGI 6454; WGI 6423, 25; 7 MR. STONE:
8 WGI 8583, 84, 85; WGI 2544393; WGI 8 Well, you're not telling him
9 36981, 82; WGI 18015, 16, 17; WGI 9 whether it's located on land or in the
10 51682; WGI 36985; WGI 343375 and 76; 10 water. That's a couple of problems.
11 WGI 71142, 43, 45, 46, 47; WGI 229272; 11 MR. BRUNO:
12 WGI 76330; WGI 76659; WGI 76660; WGI 12 Yes, I did.
13 48621 all the way to 630; and finally, 13 MR. STONE:
14 WGI 76657 and 58. 14 There are other problems.
15 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 15 MR. BRUNO:
16 Q. I'm sorry. I forgot to ask you some 16 I said it's below the wedding
17 questions on the other thing. I apologize. 17 cake.
18 Before we get to the lift station let 18 So what are the other problems?
19 me ask you a few more questions. You'll 19 Give them to me. I'll write them
20 remember that not only were they to remove this 20 down.
21 wedding cake thing, but they would remove 21 MR. STONE:
22 piling underneath it. Okay? I asked you a 22 They're the kind of problems you
23 whole bunch of questions about holes, but I 23 have there. I'm not going to fill out
24 forgot to ask you questions about the holes 24 your hypothetical for you.
25 created when you pull out a piling or other, 25 MR. BRUNO:
35 (Pages 134 to 137)
Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285
GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 138 Page 140
1 Yes, you do. You object to form, 1 hypothet. You do it.
2 you tell me what's wrong with the 2 MR. STONE:
3 form. 3 I'm not going anywhere and I'm
4 MR. STONE: 4 not going to argue with you.
5 It's an incomplete and misleading 5 MR. BRUNO:
6 hypothetical. 6 Then you have to withdraw your
7 MR. BRUNO: 7 objection.
8 What's incomplete about it? 8 MR. STONE:
9 MR. STONE: 9 I won't withdrew it.
10 Well, next you're going to accuse 10 MR. BRUNO:
11 me of talking to the witness about 11 Whatever. Okay. I'm getting
12 this. 12 tired of your silly games, counsel.
13 MR. BRUNO: 13 It's like a nine-year-old.
14 Really. 14 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
15 MR. STONE: 15 Q. We're talking about the wedding cake
16 It's an incomplete and 16 structure which we've located a hundred times.
17 misleading. That's all I have to give 17 It's on the damned drawings. We know how deep
18 you. 18 at least they thought it was. We know they
19 MR. BRUNO: 19 thought there may be piling below this thing.
20 What that tells me is -- no, on 20 We know it's within 300 feet. We know it's on
21 the contrary, the reason why, 21 the water side of the flood protection
22 Mr. Stone, you make your objections to 22 structure. All I'm trying to learn is, is the
23 form at the time of the deposition is 23 United States Army Corps of Engineers
24 so that the questioner can change the 24 interested in ascertaining whether the removal
25 question to perhaps alleviate your 25 of pilings as I've described -- I'm sorry. Is
Page 139 Page 141
1 objection. Obviously, you have no 1 the United States Army Corps of Engineers
2 clue as to why the form is defective 2 interested in whether or not after one removes
3 because you can't tell me what's wrong 3 a piling like this it may impact a flood
4 with the form. So I will proceed. 4 protection structure? That's my question.
5 Thank you, sir. 5 A. It depends on the stratification the
6 MR. STONE: 6 pile was set in.
7 It's incomplete and misleading. 7 Q. Right.
8 MR. BRUNO: 8 A. And it depends on how the pile came up
9 No, you can say that, but 9 out the ground. If these are just Class 5, 30,
10 obviously it's not because you can't 10 35-foot piles, as you pull that pile out it
11 tell me what's incomplete, nor can you 11 closed up right away just from the excessive
12 tell me what's misleading about it. 12 pressures.
13 I'll wait. You want to take some time 13 Q. Okay. All right. Now, so you really
14 off and figure it out? You want to 14 gave me two answers. You said it depends on
15 maybe take a five-minute break and 15 the stratification.
16 write down what's misleading about it? 16 A. It depends on the stratification --
17 Go ahead and do that. 17 Q. But then you said it doesn't matter,
18 MR. STONE: 18 so --
19 If you're comfortable with your 19 A. No. First of all, it depends on the
20 question -- 20 stratification. Okay?
21 MR. BRUNO: 21 Q. All right. The stratification we've
22 No, I'll wait. Let's go off the 22 got because we're going to go back and look at
23 record. You go outside and you write 23 our original design of the floodwall. And so
24 down a list of all the things that's 24 if the stratification has some sands or silts
25 misleading and incomplete about the 25 or marsh, that would merit some further
36 (Pages 138 to 141)
Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285
GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 142 Page 144
1 investigation, right? 1 top of it.
2 A. It would, but what we're saying is 2 Q. So bottom line, it's the Corps'
3 you're telling me on 35 feet below the surface, 3 position that with regard to the removal -- and
4 so I'm somewhere around -30 -- 4 please accept the three thousand or thereabouts
5 Q. You're more than that, yeah. You're 5 is remotely accurate. It's the Corps' position
6 way down to -- 6 that there's no needed to do the kind of
7 A. You know -- 7 evaluation that we've been talking about this
8 Q. -- fifty or sixty? 8 morning in the context of excavating holes with
9 A. -- and so, you know, a void at that 9 regard to the potential for negative impacts in
10 point is going to close immediately. And, you 10 a flood control structure. Right? That's the
11 know, I don't think -- you know, barring, you 11 Corps' position?
12 know, some kind of stratification that I don't 12 A. Let me rephrase it.
13 see here, um -- it would not be an issue. 13 Q. Okay.
14 Also, that there's no way you could 14 A. Okay? The void that may or may not
15 really close it because it's closing itself as 15 have been left by pulling the pile that is
16 you're pulling the piles. 16 40 -- that starts 40 feet below the ground
17 Q. All right. What about this stuff 17 surface will not impact the wall's stability.
18 called bentonite; don't they use that to fill 18 Q. I'm sorry. Starts 40 feet. Um --
19 in piling holes when the piling is removed? 19 actually starts 25 feet. I'm just trying to
20 A. Okay. What you're talking about is as 20 keep us consistent.
21 you pull up -- and that's because you're 21 A. I thought you said they went deeper
22 worried about infiltration of surface 22 than the 25 feet.
23 contaminants into the aquifer. What you're 23 Q. Yeah. But you said starts. You've
24 telling me is we're 30, 40 feet below the 24 got the concrete structure. The bottom of the
25 ground. 25 concrete structure is about 25 feet.
Page 143 Page 145
1 Q. Right. 1 A. And it went deeper.
2 A. We're going to have a cylindrical hole 2 Q. And then the piling is below that.
3 that we're going to backfill the top of anyway. 3 A. Okay.
4 So there's real no -- there's no advantage or 4 Q. So --
5 no need to take this isolated cylindrical hole 5 A. Okay. Quick question: Did the
6 in the formation which closed anyway and try 6 excavation go deeper than the 25 feet?
7 and do something with it. 7 Q. Of the hole?
8 Q. All right. Well, y'all have to 8 A. Yeah.
9 forgive me, because when you say isolated, I 9 Q. No.
10 have to then ask this question because the 10 A. Okay. So what I have is I've got a --
11 documents reflect that there are as many as 11 I start a 30-foot pile at a depth of 25 feet.
12 three thousand piling on that site. Is your 12 Q. Right. Okay. So in that
13 answer dependent -- 13 circumstance, the Corps' position is there's no
14 A. It's a function of the spacing of the 14 need to do an evaluation of those piles?
15 piles. 15 A. I would have to look at the
16 Q. Okay. Thank you. Okay. 16 stratification at that site.
17 A. If you're telling me these piles are 17 Q. That tells me then that the Corps
18 on 4 or 5-foot centers, and they're Class 5, 18 would have to do at least something.
19 30, 35-foot piles, the butt is only 8 inches in 19 A. Someone would look at the
20 diameter. So the thing just closes right up. 20 stratification.
21 Q. Right. 21 Q. That's all I'm trying to get at.
22 A. The other thing is, it's 40 feet into 22 So with regard to the removal of
23 the ground, and it's well below anything that 23 piling on this site, the Corps would say, you
24 could contribute to groundwater contamination 24 have to do something with regard to whether or
25 or a seepage issue because you're covering the 25 not there may be an impact on the flood
37 (Pages 142 to 145)
Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285
GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 146 Page 148
1 protection structure. I'm trying to make it 1 been done in that context, there should be some
2 easy. It not trying to say what it is, just 2 writings or documents that would reflect that
3 something. It's the whole business of don't 3 that was done.
4 worry about it versus we're going to do 4 A. Correct. What happens is they would
5 something. 5 have gotten something in, and somebody asked is
6 A. It has to be looked at. 6 this okay? And, you know, if it came in, you
7 Q. That's it. Okay. So it has to be 7 know, as a question, it went out answered.
8 looked at. Okay. 8 Q. Okay. And Mr. Guillory, if he's the
9 And can I conclude that your answers 9 guy, is supposed to know that he's supposed to
10 would be same, that in the context of a 10 tell you -- or not you, but supposed to tell
11 contract where some contractor like WGI did all 11 somebody in engineering to undertake this
12 the plans and described all the work, that the 12 evaluation.
13 Corps would be in the position of simply 13 A. That would be my understanding of the
14 approving their plans and then would have done 14 way construction division would work.
15 an evaluation of the piling, or whether or not 15 Q. All right. Did you in preparation for
16 something that's to be done to safeguard the 16 this deposition ask Guillory if he did that?
17 floodwall when it reviews their plans and 17 A. No, I didn't. I haven't talked to Lee
18 specifications? 18 Guillory in years.
19 A. Okay, I'm lost. Got lost halfway 19 Q. Let me show you a document which is
20 through the question. 20 identified by Plaintiffs' Exhibit Number 11
21 (Brief interruption.) 21 which is WGI 51585 --
22 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 22 (Exhibit 11 was marked for
23 Q. All right. We're talking about the 23 identification and is attached hereto.)
24 piling. 24 MR. SUTTON:
25 A. Right. 25 It should be 12, huh? You
Page 147 Page 149
1 Q. Okay. Was it the Corps' position that 1 already identified 11.
2 the Corps would have to evaluate the potential 2 MR. TREEBY:
3 negative impact of the pile removal on the 3 No, it was a mistake. That was
4 floodwall before letting WGI go forward with 4 10. He made 11 10.
5 that pile removal work? Make it simple. 5 MR. BRUNO:
6 A. Yes. 6 No, somebody said I made a
7 Q. Okay. All right. And as you sit here 7 mistake so we switched.
8 today, you don't know whether the Corps did 8 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
9 that or not. 9 Q. All right. This is in seriatim to WGI
10 A. I do not know. 10 51656. I show you Page WGI 51611. And in
11 Q. All right. Your expectation is that 11 particular the sentence I'm going to ask you
12 they would have, right? 12 the look at is the following: It says,
13 A. That's correct. 13 however, the floodwall to the east of the site
14 Q. And your further expectation is that 14 is supported on sheet pile that reaches a depth
15 not only would they have done it but there 15 of at least 25 feet. Okay? And this would
16 would be some documentation of that evaluation. 16 essentially interrupt the water flow in the
17 Right? 17 easterly direction at lower elevations to
18 A. There would be documentation of the 18 25 feet.
19 fact that they looked at the overall plan, and 19 Let me highlight it for you so you
20 if they had an objection it would have been, 20 don't have to struggle. There you go.
21 you know, stated. 21 (Tendering.)
22 Q. All right. But let's take it the next 22 A. Okay.
23 step. I think you also said that with regards 23 Q. All right. I see you're checking your
24 to, you know, the wall stability, seepage 24 diagram there to look at the sheet pile tip
25 analysis and global stability that should have 25 depths.
38 (Pages 146 to 149)
Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285
GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 150 Page 152
1 First of all, this is not a document 1 MR. STONE:
2 that was written by you guys. 2 This one?
3 A. All right. 3 THE WITNESS:
4 Q. You can see that, right? I mean, this 4 Yeah.
5 was -- from the cover, it was written by -- it 5 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
6 was prepared for the Corps under contract by 6 Q. If you don't know --
7 Washington Group, not you. 7 A. Well, I'm looking for the title block.
8 A. I understand. 8 See, normally you have to go -- for the
9 Q. So nobody is pointing a finger at you. 9 locations of the borings, you see the plans.
10 But it's clear, is it not, that this 10 Q. I'm sorry. You need to do what?
11 sentence is inaccurate, that the sentence that 11 A. See right here it says, for the
12 says the floodwall to the east of the site is 12 location of the borings -- this doesn't tell me
13 supported on sheet pile that reaches a depth of 13 where these -- I need to know where these
14 at least 25 feet, that's flat out wrong. 14 borings are so I know where the profiles are.
15 Right? 15 Q. Okay. Well, it gives you the stations
16 A. That's correct. 16 at the top, 0 to 90 there, and this one is from
17 Q. All right. Now, and for whatever 17 90 to 800, which presumably is the entire
18 reason, and I'm not suggesting you know what 18 length.
19 the reason may be, that anybody was relying on 19 A. Okay. So we're sure that's the east
20 this sheet pile to interrupt water flow, okay, 20 side. That's why I'm asking the question.
21 the fact is, because the sheet pile only goes 21 Q. Well, I can only do so much of the
22 to eight feet it would not -- there was no 22 work for you. Okay? No, I'll help you any way
23 sheet pile there to interrupt water flow below 23 I can. Let help me look at it some more.
24 that sheet pile tip depth, correct? 24 Well, actually --
25 A. Correct. 25 MR. STONE:
Page 151 Page 153
1 Q. All right. Thank you. 1 Joe, that may be not the IHNC
2 (Lunch break.) 2 part of MRGO right there, around the
3 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 3 corner, or the GIWW, somewhere along
4 Q. You referred to a stratification 4 there.
5 document which was a document that was part of 5 MR. BRUNO:
6 the original construction of the flood control 6 You mean the 0?
7 structures? Can we attach those, please, if 7 MR. STONE:
8 you don't mind? As exhibit number what? 8 One of these is for the part of
9 MS. LABOURDETTE: 9 the IHNC, the other isn't.
10 12. 10 A. See, this is showing a levee. There
11 (Exhibit 12 was marked for 11 is an I-wall that ties in at a higher
12 identification and is attached hereto.) 12 elevation, another I-wall.
13 MR. STONE: 13 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
14 Ask the witness if that's it. 14 Q. And this one showing the stationing,
15 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 15 and my memory is -- where's -- does anybody
16 Q. Is this it? There are two documents 16 remember, it went to -- the history station
17 there. 17 number, the highest station number, was it 800?
18 A. This is geologic profiles, um -- 18 It wasn't that high. It's like 600 something.
19 MR. STONE: 19 MR. BAEZA:
20 Is that what you were talking 20 Along here?
21 about? 21 MR. TREEBY:
22 MR. BRUNO: 22 Well, the exhibit is there.
23 Yes. I mean, I guess. 23 MR. BRUNO:
24 A. This is at the location that we're 24 No, no, no no. Reach 2.
25 concerned with? 25 MR. BAEZA:
39 (Pages 150 to 153)
Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285
GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 154 Page 156
1 Oh. Reach 2, it goes up to -- 1 help you?
2 MR. BRUNO: 2 MR. TREEBY:
3 Like 800, doesn't it? I think 3 Could we identify what the
4 Richard is right. 4 witness is looking at, please.
5 MR. BAEZA: 5 MR. BRUNO:
6 I think Bayou Dupre is around 6 We sure will, after he looks at
7 700. It goes a little bit higher. 7 it.
8 MR. BRUNO: 8 A. This is Design Memorandum Number 3,
9 Yeah, I think you're right. 9 Lake Pontchartrain and Vicinity.
10 Well, there's no Bates number on here, 10 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
11 so I'd like a copy if that's okay with 11 Q. All right.
12 you. 12 A. Let's see. Okay, that's the east
13 MR. STONE: 13 side.
14 Just attach them. 14 Q. That's the east side. Great. Okay.
15 MR. BAEZA: 15 All right.
16 This is from General Design 16 So to kind of just center us, this is
17 Memorandum 3, Chalmette area plan from 17 the document that you, the Corps of Engineers,
18 our general disclosures. 18 would reference in order to do your seepage
19 On the IPET website, too. 19 analysis, your wall stability analysis, and
20 MR. BRUNO: 20 your global stability analysis. I'm not saying
21 All right. And that's fine. 21 its the only thing you look at, I'm just saying
22 So for the record, I've marked as 22 it's one of the things you would look at to --
23 Exhibits 12 Plate Number 28 and Plate 23 A. Correct.
24 Number 29. Plate Number 28 seems to 24 (Brief interruption.)
25 be -- it says, north end of lock. 25 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
Page 155 Page 157
1 That will help us out pretty good 1 Q. Right?
2 there. And then it says top of levee, 2 A. One of the things I would use.
3 so -- um -- seems like. 3 Q. Right. We got that.
4 A. Well, it's either the east or the west 4 A. Okay.
5 side, and that's my question. 5 Q. I didn't mean to suggest otherwise.
6 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 6 Now, this shows that there's a pretty
7 Q. Right. Where's your other ones? 7 good marsh deposit between 10 and, I don't
8 Let's take a look at this. Where's the look on 8 know, 20 feet that underlays -- it's right
9 this sucker? 9 below the sheet pile tip. (Tendering.)
10 A. It's not on the page. 10 A. Yeah. It's showing the marsh deposit
11 Q. It will be south, huh? 11 as a clay deposit, though. Organic clay with,
12 A. The lock. (Nods affirmatively.) 12 um -- organic matters in it.
13 MR. JOANEN: 13 Q. Right. So it's got -- but it's got a
14 That's it right there. That's 14 lot of organic matter in it, doesn't it?
15 all your plates. That's the whole 15 A. It depends where you are in the
16 thing. So that's Plate 28 you're 16 deposit.
17 looking at, so it would be right up in 17 Q. All right. And that's --
18 there. 18 A. It's more than 50 percent clay, though
19 THE WITNESS: 19 by classification.
20 Okay. So that is on the east 20 Q. Well, it says, according to the
21 side? 21 legend, marsh, very soft organic clays with
22 MR. JOANEN: 22 peat.
23 I don't know. 23 A. Right.
24 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 24 Q. So --
25 Q. Here's the whole stack. Will that 25 A. But if you look at the crosshatched
40 (Pages 154 to 157)
Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285
GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 158 Page 160
1 area -- look at the crosshatched area and look 1 would mandate a review by the Corps of
2 at legend on the bottom, is a CHO. It's an 2 Engineers to determine whether or not there's
3 organic clay, which means it's more than half 3 the potential for impact to the flood control
4 clay. 4 structure?
5 Q. All right. 5 A. Well, depending on its location with
6 A. If it was an OH, that means it would 6 respect to the floodwall, we'd want to see it.
7 be all organic. 7 Q. All right. It's within 300 feet.
8 Q. Okay. Well, why are there two 8 It's on the water side of the IHNC.
9 different -- well, let me ask you this: Do you 9 A. Okay, we would probably expect to see
10 regard the description to the left under the 10 it.
11 word legend which says marsh to be different 11 Q. All right. And without me having to
12 from the crosshatch on the right which says 12 ask all the same questions again that I asked
13 clay with organic matter? Are they saying the 13 with regard to the Boland Marine hole --
14 same thing? 14 A. Uh-huh.
15 A. No. The marsh is the environment. 15 Q. -- would you believe that a wall
16 It's a type of environment. Like you see where 16 stability analysis would be required?
17 it says fill is channel fill. 17 A. Yes.
18 Q. Right. 18 Q. Would you believe a seepage analysis
19 A. That tells you what type of 19 would be required?
20 environment it is. The legend by your thumb on 20 A. Yes.
21 the right is telling you what type of material 21 Q. Would you believe a global stability
22 it is, and that's a clay with organics. 22 analysis would be required?
23 Q. Okay. Well, the environment that the 23 A. Yes, as well as a TRS analysis for the
24 clay lives in is a very soft organic clay with 24 stability of the actual temporary retaining
25 peat in it. 25 structure.
Page 159 Page 161
1 A. Correct. 1 Q. And the reference would be in the
2 Q. All right. So it's permeable. 2 context of the analysis to this Plaintiffs'
3 A. It has some forms of permeability. 3 Exhibit Number 12, the first page.
4 Q. All right. 4 A. That would be some of the information.
5 A. Not like a sand or a gravel or 5 There's probably some updated information, more
6 anything like that. 6 recent borings than what were used to develop
7 Q. I understand that. But it's got 7 that.
8 permeability. Right? 8 Q. All right. Now, here we have among
9 A. (Nods affirmatively.) 9 these papers a lift station plan, revised, and
10 Q. Okay. Now, that means, then, that 10 then we have -- we have a document WGI 76654,
11 there's the potential for water to travel 11 and it says transmittal of shop drawings,
12 through this area, right? 12 equipment, data, materials, samples and
13 A. Correct. 13 manufacturers' certificate of compliance. You
14 Q. Okay. Let's go to the, um -- lift 14 see that?
15 station removal. I have already identified 15 A. Okay. Uh-huh.
16 Plaintiffs' Exhibit Number 10. It says on Page 16 Q. Let's talk for a moment about the only
17 WGI 48626, excavation bottom will be at 17 form only, just this form piece of paper.
18 elevation -19.75? 18 MR. STONE:
19 A. Okay. 19 Is this from that composite
20 Q. All right. Assuming that that's 20 document that you had?
21 accurate, because I know you haven't had a 21 MR. BRUNO:
22 chance to carefully, you know, go through this. 22 Yes.
23 But simple question: If they're digging a hole 23 MR. STONE:
24 which requires a cofferdam and the bottom is at 24 What's the --
25 elevation 19.75, is this the kind of hole that 25 MR. BRUNO:
41 (Pages 158 to 161)
Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285
GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 162 Page 164
1 I just gave it. 1 that proposal, there should be a form like this
2 MR. TREEBY: 2 that says approved, signed by the Corps and
3 What's the Bates number? 3 accepted by the contracting -- I'm sorry.
4 MR. BRUNO: 4 Signed by the contracting officer and then
5 You want -- again? 5 signed by the Washington Group people?
6 MR. TREEBY: 6 A. If that excavation was a required
7 Of that one page. 7 submittal, like I told you, it could be handled
8 MR. BRUNO: 8 in different ways. It could have been part of
9 I just gave it. 9 the plans, the initial task order that didn't
10 MR. TREEBY: 10 require a submittal.
11 Oh, I'm sorry. I got it. 11 Q. Okay.
12 MR. STONE: 12 A. So this is for a submittal. This is
13 Exhibit number? It's 10. 13 how you transmit required submittals.
14 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 14 Q. Okay. All right. And when it's
15 Q. Exhibit number 10, for the record, 15 required or not required depends upon --
16 again, WGI 076654. My question is only about 16 A. It's called out in the task order. If
17 the form. Okay? Not what's on this piece of 17 it's a required submittal, it's actually called
18 paper. 18 out in the task order.
19 A. Okay. 19 Q. Well, if there's -- if it's not
20 Q. Is this the form that would be 20 required, there would be an indication about
21 utilized to approve or disapprove the proposal 21 your, what you call it, your line?
22 made by the contracting group, the Washington 22 A. Minimum control line.
23 Group International? 23 Q. Yeah. I mean, if you are not going to
24 A. This is how it would be transmitted. 24 require evaluation by the engineering group,
25 Um -- 25 then there should be language in the task order
Page 163 Page 165
1 Q. How what would be transmitted? 1 that says the minimum control line is whatever
2 A. This is how the drawings -- shop 2 it is so that somebody would know whether to
3 drawings, the contractor would transmit the 3 submit it to engineering or not, right?
4 data to the Corps, and then the Corps would use 4 A. Well, there is also what's called
5 this and a cover form to transmit it within its 5 engineering considerations that the people in
6 organization. 6 the field have.
7 Q. Okay. But again, the question is, is 7 Q. Who are the people?
8 this the form that would be used to indicate 8 A. That's the Lee Guillory group. The
9 approval or disapproval? 9 people who are actually in the field.
10 A. No. That's not -- not within the 10 Q. All right.
11 organization. This is between construction 11 A. You know, what we have is called
12 division and the, um -- contractor. There's a 12 engineering considerations, and that's
13 separate form that we in the organization would 13 things -- design aspects that they have. That
14 use. 14 minimum control line would have been considered
15 Q. Maybe I didn't ask my question well 15 an engineering consideration. Anything that
16 enough. The question is whether or not this 16 doesn't violate this minimum control line is
17 form would be the form that the Corps would 17 not a problem.
18 utilize to tell WGI that the Corps approves or 18 Q. Okay. Well, you got me totally
19 disapproves the proposed work? 19 confused because we didn't talk about that this
20 A. There's coding that goes on that form, 20 morning.
21 yes. 21 A. You didn't ask about that this
22 Q. So this would be the form. 22 morning.
23 A. (Nods affirmatively.) 23 Q. Oh, yes, I did. Yes, I did. I asked
24 Q. All right. And just to jump back to 24 you --
25 Boland for a second, if the Corps had approved 25 MR. STONE:
42 (Pages 162 to 165)
Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285
GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 166 Page 168
1 Don't argue with the witness. 1 A. Construction division, yes.
2 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 2 Q. Lee Guillory can't create this
3 Q. -- to cover all the circumstances 3 himself, can he?
4 about the hole. You said to me that one way to 4 A. No.
5 deal with these holes is that you could have 5 Q. And he does not have the authority of
6 had a -- 6 this district office to make those decisions by
7 A. Minimum control line. 7 himself.
8 Q. -- minimum control line. You said 8 A. Correct.
9 without a minimum control line you'd have to 9 Q. And absent him having in his hands a
10 have them evaluated. 10 control line, if he encounters a hole, or at
11 A. Correct. 11 least he comes to know that there's going to be
12 Q. Are you saying something different 12 an excavation down to 25 feet, or in this case
13 now? 13 20 feet, he knows that he's required to notify
14 A. No. 14 the engineering department so that they can
15 Q. Okay. 15 evaluate the potential impact of the hole on
16 A. The minimum control line would have 16 the flood control structure, right?
17 been considered an engineering consideration. 17 A. Absent engineering considerations that
18 Q. I'm not sure I understand that. What 18 cover it.
19 do you mean? If it's within your control line, 19 Q. Okay. The answer is he's required to
20 then what's the engineering consideration? 20 give that to the engineering department for
21 A. Let's redefine an engineering 21 their review. Yes?
22 consideration. 22 A. Correct.
23 Q. Okay. 23 Q. All right. Now, does it ever become
24 A. An engineering consideration is some 24 necessary to get Vicksburg engineering involved
25 facts that are given to the people in the field 25 in these issues? And I'm going to define these
Page 167 Page 169
1 about the design. Okay? And the minimum 1 issues to be the business of evaluating a hole
2 control line would have been one of the facts 2 to ascertain whether or not -- a hole, work,
3 that the people in the field would have been 3 excavation, anything, that may impact --
4 given. 4 A. When you refer to Vicksburg, you're
5 Q. Okay. But I thought this morning you 5 referring to who?
6 told me that that would be documented in the 6 Q. Vicksburg engineering.
7 task order. 7 A. Well, wait. There's a Vicksburg
8 A. No, engineering considerations are 8 District, which would not get involved because
9 what the people in the field -- additional 9 it's outside of the district boundaries.
10 information that they have to help them 10 There's the division office which is set up
11 administer the contract. 11 there which is a regional business center that
12 Q. All right. And you're telling me that 12 has some level of expertise that uses what's
13 the minimum control line is, itself, an 13 called a community of practice where if New
14 engineering consideration. 14 Orleans needed additional technical help we
15 A. An engineering consideration, correct. 15 would ask division to get -- go into the
16 Q. Is that documented somewhere? 16 community of practice. Now, you also have
17 A. It would normally be transmitted to 17 ERDIC up there which is the research lab. So I
18 the construction division. I mean, Lee 18 see no reason why any of them would be
19 Guillory could tell you. 19 involved.
20 Q. All right. If there was an 20 Q. Okay. That's fair enough. Do you
21 engineering consideration which included a 21 know Jim Montegut?
22 control line, there would be documentation 22 A. The name is familiar. I think he
23 between the engineering department and the 23 works in construction division.
24 contracting department that Lee Guillory could 24 Q. All right. Now, attached to this
25 rely on, right? 25 denial is -- it says, the revised lift station
43 (Pages 166 to 169)
Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285
GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 170 Page 172
1 removal plan is returned code E, disapproved. 1 this question: Obviously, because they're
2 A. Okay. 2 piling there, once again you would assume that
3 Q. And this is obviously the indication 3 the Corps had -- the engineering department of
4 by the Corps of what they perceive to be the 4 this local office would have approved the
5 problems. 5 pulling of those piles as to whether or not
6 A. Okay. 6 that activity could potentially affect the
7 Q. And they're obviously not going to 7 flood control structures there. Right?
8 approve the proposed work until they come in -- 8 A. I would assume that.
9 they're consistent with the Corps' critique, 9 Q. All right. And once again, if those
10 right? 10 piles were deeper than 20 feet from the
11 A. Correct. 11 surface, you would expect the engineering
12 Q. Okay. 12 department to have reviewed them.
13 MR. TREEBY: 13 A. That whole plan was reviewed by the
14 I'm sorry, Joe, but would you 14 engineering department.
15 read -- I don't think you gave the 15 Q. What whole plan?
16 Bates number of that page that you're 16 A. The whole concept. The braced
17 referring to when it said disapproved. 17 excavation. And this is all part of the braced
18 MR. BRUNO: 18 excavation.
19 Yeah, that was the one I said was 19 Q. I don't think the piling was in there.
20 the form, but this is the third time. 20 Let me just check it.
21 MR. TREEBY: 21 A. Apparently, the removal of the piling
22 Oh, it's the same page? 22 is required to build the braced excavation.
23 MR. BRUNO: 23 Q. It says -- I'm sorry. I'm reading
24 Same page. Same page. 24 from WGI 52125. The area of soil around the 8
25 MR. TREEBY: 25 timber piles located on the bottom of the
Page 171 Page 173
1 I didn't know it was the same 1 excavation will be excavated to expose the tops
2 page. 2 of the piles. The piles will be extracted from
3 MR. BRUNO: 3 the ground using an LS 410 one-ton crawler
4 Same page. 4 crane equipped with a hydraulic vibratory pile
5 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 5 extractor. The extracted timber piles will be
6 Q. I'm now looking at WGI 76657, which 6 staged for testing by WGINT, et cetera, et
7 appears to be now the approval of the proposal 7 cetera.
8 to remove the lift station. But just check me 8 So, again, your testimony is that the
9 out on that if you don't mind. (Tendering.) 9 Corps, being advised of the fact that they were
10 A. Okay. Well, it's a partial approval 10 going to remove piles, would have had the
11 here. 11 engineering department review this activity.
12 Q. Right. He's letting them start the 12 A. That whole document.
13 work, though. 13 Q. The whole document.
14 A. Resubmit revised removal plan to 14 A. Correct.
15 include addendum items plus a sequence of work 15 Q. And again, for the purposes of
16 section as per discussion with USACE Harry 16 ascertaining whether or not there was any
17 Fermin on 10/15/01. Approve to commence pile 17 potential impact to the flood control structure
18 removal and sheet pile driving provided a 18 there. Right?
19 revised plan is submitted no later than. So he 19 A. Correct.
20 can't dig anything, he can just start -- 20 Q. And it's mandatory, it's not
21 Q. He can pull those piles. 21 discretionary. Right?
22 A. Right. I don't think he's -- the 22 A. That document was -- was reviewed
23 piles he's talking about are probably adjacent 23 based on the stability of the wall.
24 piles so he can drive his sheets. 24 Q. Right. But the review is mandatory,
25 Q. No. I'm with you. I was going to ask 25 it's not discretionary by the Corps.
44 (Pages 170 to 173)
Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285
GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 174 Page 176
1 MR. STONE: 1 A. It's a grand total of maybe three
2 Object. 2 eighths of an inch thick.
3 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 3 Q. Right.
4 Q. According to own internal procedures. 4 A. So all you've got is a three-eighths
5 Right? 5 of an inch thick sliver that, um -- of soil
6 A. Right. By our own internal procedures 6 that closes up instantaneously. They pull it
7 we look at it, yes. 7 with a vibratory hammer. The whole pile is
8 Q. Meaning you have to do it. 8 vibrating and it closes up.
9 A. Yeah. Okay. I mean, that's -- as 9 Q. Well --
10 opposed to not have to do it? Is that the -- 10 A. We went through a lot of this as part
11 you know. 11 of the SELA Project with the TRSs adjacent to
12 Q. Well, I mean, you have to do it or you 12 the canals and stuff like that, and, you know,
13 don't have to do it. That's pretty black and 13 there were test sections that were done, and we
14 white to me. 14 found that, you know, that you could have a
15 A. It's in our process and procedures, we 15 plug at the top, but as far as deep down it
16 follow our process and procedures. 16 closed itself up.
17 Q. And your process and procedures say do 17 Q. All right. Now, and just let me
18 it. 18 finish this line if you don't mind.
19 A. Correct. 19 A. Sure.
20 Q. Thank you. 20 Q. When you were trained as an engineer,
21 Now, the piling -- I'm sorry. The 21 did you receive any training which allows you
22 cofferdam itself has sheet piles which create 22 to draw that conclusion; was there some course
23 the opportunity to remove whatever concrete 23 or lecture or some textbook?
24 thing is in there, and then they backfill that 24 A. I would say in basic soil mechanics,
25 and then they are going to remove those 25 which talks about active earth pressure, which
Page 175 Page 177
1 pilings. 1 explains why the hole would close itself up.
2 A. Correct. 2 Q. All right. And would the answer be
3 Q. Is it necessarily to do an engineering 3 the same with regard to holes created by the
4 evaluation for the purposes of determining 4 removal of the piling?
5 whether or not the removal of those sheet piles 5 A. Over time, those holes will close, but
6 may impact the floodwall? 6 it takes a longer amount of time. That's also
7 A. No. 7 a function of depth and diameter of hole, and
8 Q. Okay. Why not? 8 the actual overburden pressure.
9 A. They're non displacement piles. When 9 Q. Okay. Overburden pressure coming from
10 they come out, the hole closes itself up. 10 above?
11 Q. All right. Now, I'm just curious, 11 A. Is the weight of the soil above.
12 only because, frankly -- and I'm no engineer. 12 Q. Right. And we're looking at WGI
13 I've heard other engineers say something 13 36984, and it talks about the -- it says,
14 different. Okay? So I have to ask, is there 14 backfill should be completed with -- in two to
15 some kind of a journal or publication or 15 three foot lifts with bucket compaction, so
16 scientific text that we can -- that you base 16 there's no indication as to any precise
17 that view on, that is, when you pull a Z pile 17 specification for backfill, right? You can
18 that it closes itself up? 18 just fill it up.
19 A. I would -- I'm sure it's in numerous 19 A. And compact it so there's no big
20 texts. To quote a text right now, I can't come 20 voids.
21 off the top of my head. You've got to realize 21 Q. All right. And there is no compaction
22 when you pull that sheet pile it doesn't take 22 requirement other than you can roll over the
23 any soil with it, or rarely takes any soil with 23 top of it.
24 it. 24 A. Well, bucket compaction is when you
25 Q. Right. I've seen that. I agree. 25 take the weight of the bucket and push the
45 (Pages 174 to 177)
Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285
GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 178 Page 180
1 soils down. 1 questions about -- we talked about holes, we
2 Q. Right. 2 talked about removing the pile, but what we
3 A. And that takes out all the air voids, 3 haven't talked about is using the vibrator pile
4 it gets it down to its natural void ratio. 4 drive device. Okay? Is there any potential
5 Q. Okay. And there's nothing that would 5 that the use of a vibrator pile driving device
6 have prohibited WGI from compacting it further. 6 to extract piles or to put pile in could have
7 A. Correct. 7 any deleterious effect on the flood control
8 Q. Now, WGI 52124, and I'll show this to 8 structure?
9 you if you need to, but it says after reviewing 9 A. No, not in the way it was used here,
10 the soil borings with our engineers and 10 you know, as long as you're not doing it to the
11 performing exploratory excavations around the 11 structure itself.
12 lift station, we discovered that the subgrade 12 Q. To the flood control structure itself?
13 and the soil conditions surrounding the lift 13 A. Right. In other words, as long as the
14 station are weak and, therefore, not ideal for 14 piles aren't hitting up against the flood
15 slide rail type shoring system initially 15 control structure, no.
16 proposed. Furthermore, the subgrade is wet and 16 Q. Would it be the kind of thing that
17 consists of primarily sandy silt type soils 17 would require this engineering evaluation that
18 which are not conducive when using the slide 18 we talked about in the context of holes and the
19 rail type shoring system. 19 removal of piling?
20 Is that the kind of soils that you 20 A. There is a, um -- a vibration
21 would have expected to be there based upon an 21 threshold that we establish, that the
22 evaluation of this Exhibit 12? 22 contractor, you know, has to stay underneath.
23 A. What happens is that's probably 23 Q. Okay.
24 backfill that was used when the thing was 24 A. And it's an extremely low threshold.
25 constructed. 25 And so that would not have any impact on the
Page 179 Page 181
1 Q. You men that list station thing. 1 integrity of the wall.
2 A. That lift station. 2 Q. All right. Well, so that -- forgive
3 Q. Okay. And I gather from your answer 3 me what, did you call it, a --
4 that, therefore, that's not the kind of soil 4 A. Vibration threshold.
5 that you would have expected to be there in 5 Q. -- vibration threshold. That would be
6 their natural state. 6 assigned by the Corps and that would be
7 A. It's not a real accurate description 7 communicated by the Corps to the contractor in
8 of soil. What he has is more of a, you know, a 8 writing, right?
9 layman 's description. 9 A. That I would think would be part of
10 Q. Right. 10 the task order.
11 A. But what I'm hearing is it's a wet 11 Q. Okay. Are you aware as to whether or
12 sandy material, sandy silty material, which is 12 not there's -- well, first of all, what is a
13 the type of material you'd use in backfill. 13 growth fault?
14 Now, I don't think they're saying it as having 14 A. That's a fault that's actually going
15 a very large extent, they're just saying it in 15 up instead of going down.
16 the vicinity of the structure. 16 Q. Okay. Do you know whether or not
17 Q. Right. 17 there is a growth fault at any location within
18 A. Which was obviously built in the 18 this flood protection structure along the Lower
19 ground and came up and was backfilled. 19 Ninth?
20 Q. Okay. All right. But bottom line, 20 A. I know that the whole near surface
21 it's inconsistent with what you would expect by 21 faulting is, you know, a, um -- a theory of
22 review of Plaintiffs' Exhibit 12. 22 some people. And I know of no faulting at all
23 A. Correct. It's an anomaly in that 23 in this area.
24 system. 24 Q. All right. You've heard of
25 Q. Thank you. Now, just a few more 25 Mr. Gagliano?
46 (Pages 178 to 181)
Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285
GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 182 Page 184
1 A. Woody Gagliano. Very familiar with 1 any role in assessing whether or not
2 him. 2 construction activities on the water side of
3 Q. I know you are. And he's the one that 3 that wall might have any deleterious effect on
4 suggests that there's this growth fault in that 4 the flood control structure.
5 area, right? 5 A. I have no idea of either the location
6 A. Correct. 6 or the depth of the break at Betsy. So I
7 Q. Okay. What if anything has the Corps 7 really can't answer.
8 done to ascertain whether there is or is not a 8 Q. All right. Now, are you familiar with
9 growth fault zone at the location of the Lower 9 the IPET report?
10 Nine flood protection structure? 10 A. Somewhat.
11 A. We've listened to Mr. Gagliano on a 11 Q. Okay.
12 number of occasions, many occasions. 12 A. It's got 8 volumes.
13 Q. Right. 13 Q. Yeah. Well, I only want to talk about
14 A. We have looked at what he brings to 14 the first page.
15 the table, and he has yet to show anything 15 A. Okay.
16 substantive of the whole faulting issue. Quite 16 Q. First page of the report says,
17 frankly, he's still looking -- it's a theory 17 generally, and I'm paraphrasing here, that
18 that he has, and he's looking for someone to 18 there are only four foundation failures that
19 help fund a very deep research project to prove 19 occurred as a result of Katrina.
20 the theory. 20 A. Okay.
21 Q. Okay. I take it by your answer that 21 Q. Do you recall that to be accurate?
22 the Corps has not done any evaluation of its 22 A. I vaguely remember something to that
23 own on that issue. 23 effect.
24 A. We have not looked into, um -- his 24 Q. All right. And there is a phrase that
25 theory any further than looking at the data 25 said -- that goes guess something like this:
Page 183 Page 185
1 that he's presented. You know, we're well 1 With regard to all of the other levee breaching
2 aware of general subsidence, we're well aware 2 that occurred in the entire system, the levees
3 of benchmark movement, but the explanations 3 performed as designed.
4 that we have for those are different than the 4 A. Okay. I agree with that.
5 explanation that he offers. 5 Q. All right. Well, you've answered --
6 Q. All right. Are you aware of the 6 well, the first question was is that accurate?
7 location of the breaks in the flood protection 7 And the second question was going to be do you
8 structures that occurred during Hurricane 8 agree? And I guess the answer to both is yes.
9 Betsy, as to where they were located relative 9 A. Yes. The levees performed as they
10 to the breaks that occurred during Katrina? 10 were designed, as far as --
11 MR. STONE: 11 Q. And that is that the Corps new and had
12 I will object to this, but I'm 12 an expectation that if water went over the top
13 not asking the witness not to answer 13 there was the potential for back side scouring
14 it. 14 and the failure of the levee. Right?
15 MR. BRUNO: 15 A. Yeah. The levees were designed for a
16 I know. But I'm establishing a 16 specific elevation.
17 foundation for the next question, 17 Q. Right.
18 Richard. 18 A. Okay? And they met their job for that
19 A. No. I don't know exactly where the 19 elevation.
20 breaks were in Betsy. 20 Q. All right. And to be specific, the
21 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 21 original authorization says built to a standard
22 Q. Okay. And to be fair, the reason I'm 22 project hurricane.
23 asking the question was to learn whether or 23 When you take the standard project
24 not -- whether the break that occurred in Betsy 24 hurricane and you boil it down to its basics,
25 in that area might have or should have played 25 that's an elevation. Right?
47 (Pages 182 to 185)
Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285
GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 186 Page 188
1 A. Correct. 1 contributing now.
2 Q. Okay. And the Corps of Engineers was 2 A. Well, the trouble with the verbiage
3 not authorized to do anything more than build 3 we're using right now is, by definition
4 to that elevation, right? 4 underseepage is water passing under the wall.
5 A. Correct. 5 Q. Right.
6 Q. Okay. Now, so that the south breach 6 A. And water passed under that much of
7 on Lower Nine was caused, in the Corps' view, 7 the wall because a crack formed along the flood
8 by overtopping and back side failure, right? 8 side of the wall and passed underneath it. So
9 A. Correct. 9 by definition, that's seepage passing under the
10 Q. Okay. Now, the north side, not north 10 wall. You're using underseepage as something
11 side, but the northern breach, is one of those 11 entering --
12 locations where there's a discussion of 12 Q. From away?
13 foundation failure. 13 A. -- from away, your 25-foot hole, and
14 A. Correct. 14 following a tortuous path to get to the tip.
15 Q. All right. Does the Corps believe 15 Q. Uh-huh.
16 that underseepage had any role in that 16 A. So obviously you would have much
17 foundation failure? 17 higher pressures at the tip as a result of the
18 A. The Corps' belief is that the 18 wall opening up and getting full hydrostatic
19 methodology of failure was the crack formed 19 pressure as opposed to water entering at the
20 between the sheet pile and the embankment as a 20 bottom of this excavation and taking this
21 result of sheet pile deflection, that excess of 21 tortuous path.
22 full hydrostatic pressure went down into the 22 Q. Does the Corps regard that foundation
23 formation directly below the tip of the 23 failure as a defect in design? I'm sorry.
24 sheet -- 24 Does the Corps regard that foundation
25 Q. Uh-huh. 25 failure to have resulted from a defect in the
Page 187 Page 189
1 A. -- and fully charged it to whatever 1 design of the levee?
2 the elevation was at the canal, and that 2 MR. STONE:
3 weakened the inner particle pressure because of 3 Objection. The witness is not
4 the excess pore pressure, and that was the 4 called to speak to that. You're
5 mechanism for failure. 5 asking for an expert opinion and he's
6 Q. That doesn't exclude any contribution 6 not brought here as an expert.
7 by underseepage, does it? 7 MR. BRUNO:
8 A. Well, at the end of the day we're 8 No, I'm really not.
9 talking underseepage. What we're talking about 9 MR. STONE:
10 is an increase in pore pressure. The cause for 10 You've actually asked for certain
11 the increase in pore pressure was the injection 11 topics here that he's been prepared to
12 of the hydrostatic pressure that was in the 12 speak to and he's spoken very well to
13 canal down the face of the sheet pile without 13 them, but that's not of the topics
14 any head loss so as it hit the tip of the sheet 14 he's been prepared. Now, if you want
15 pile, it had it's full excess head. 15 to ask him --
16 Q. Uh-huh. 16 MR. BRUNO:
17 A. Okay? If you were looking at 17 Lateral transition failure -- I
18 underseepage, you would have to have a head 18 mean, it's all in here, Richard. All
19 loss as the water had to go through this 19 considerations, concerns -- I mean,
20 tortuous path to get to that point. So. 20 it's all here. Lateral transition
21 Q. So in your view, that explanation does 21 failure. I mean, I'm just trying to
22 exclude underseepage as a contributing factor? 22 find out. I'm not suggesting that
23 A. It excludes it as a primary, as the 23 there is any expert opinion here.
24 primary factor. 24 What I'm trying to find out is what is
25 Q. I didn't say that. I said 25 the Corps' view. Now, is the Corps'
48 (Pages 186 to 189)
Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285
GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 190 Page 192
1 view that there was a defect in that 1 fair enough?
2 levee design, or is it the Corps' view 2 A. The design as was done in 1969,
3 that there was no defect? And 3 correct.
4 whatever that position is I'd like to 4 Q. It's not defective.
5 know it. 5 A. The design in 1969 was not defective.
6 MR. STONE: 6 Q. Not defective. The construction is
7 And the objection here is the 7 not defective. Right?
8 witness is not called to speak for 8 A. I don't know. You know, I don't know
9 that. Now you can ask him what his 9 of any construction defect.
10 opinion is or whatever, but he's not 10 Q. Okay. All right. That's all. I'm
11 called to speak for the Corps on that 11 just --
12 issue and you haven't asked for that. 12 A. I understand.
13 MR. BRUNO: 13 Q. It's not heavy, man.
14 Well, I think any and all 14 Okay. Now, isn't the method of
15 considerations or concerns of lateral 15 failure exactly the same method of failure
16 transition failure, it's all over this 16 experienced by the Corps when it did its test
17 document. So let's leave that fight 17 in the Atchafalaya basin in 1986 or '7?
18 for another day. 18 MR. STONE:
19 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 19 Objection. Once again you're
20 Q. Let me get the Corps' opinion subject 20 getting outside the area.
21 to Richard 's objection. 21 MR. BRUNO:
22 Is it the Corps' opinion that there 22 Well, it specifically relates to
23 was a defect in the design of the levee at the 23 underseepage and disturbance of soil
24 north breach? 24 and lateral transition failure and --
25 THE WITNESS: 25 I mean, it's all there.
Page 191 Page 193
1 You want me to answer or not? 1 MR. STONE:
2 MR. STONE: 2 No, it's not.
3 Answer from your own perspective 3 MR. BRUNO:
4 out of your own personal knowledge. 4 Well, we have a difference of
5 But he's not speaking for the 5 opinion.
6 Corps on this issue. 6 MR. STONE:
7 MR. BRUNO: 7 Because your request here focused
8 That's your view. He's a 8 on --
9 30(b)(6) witness, and we'll fight 9 MR. BRUNO:
10 another day as to whether or not it's 10 It says any and all
11 in here or not. 11 considerations. Any and all. There
12 MR. STONE: 12 is nothing broader than any and all
13 And we can do that. 13 considerations.
14 MR. BRUNO: 14 MR. STONE:
15 That's fine. Your objection is 15 You're reading your own language
16 reserved. 16 out of context. So you've got my --
17 A. The study as presented by IPET, 17 MR. BRUNO:
18 reviewed by the USACE and numerous people in 18 That's interesting since I wrote
19 academia, indicate that the methodology of 19 it.
20 failure was not a methodology that the Corps of 20 MR. STONE:
21 Engineers studied back in 1969 when the wall 21 You've got my objection.
22 was designed. 22 MR. BRUNO:
23 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 23 I'm reading my own language out
24 Q. Okay. So it's your opinion, your 24 of context. And I put in here, the
25 view, that there's no defect in the design; 25 Corps' knowledge. Right? So the
49 (Pages 190 to 193)
Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285
GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 194 Page 196
1 Corps knows about the tests that it 1 Q. Right. Did underseepage play a role
2 did. Right? 2 at 17th?
3 MR. STONE: 3 MR. STONE:
4 I'm not going to argue with you. 4 Objection.
5 I've just objected here. 5 MR. BRUNO:
6 MR. BRUNO: 6 It's noted.
7 Okay. That's fine. 7 A. Okay. The reduced shear strength was
8 A. Ask the question again. I've got a 8 a result of the fact that you had excess pore
9 short attention span. 9 pressure induced when the wall opened up. Just
10 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 10 like I said before, you had full hydrostatic
11 Q. I'm with you, man. We could be out of 11 pressure inserted at the tip of the sheet.
12 here. 12 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
13 You did some tests at the Atchafalaya 13 Q. Let me make sure I ask the question
14 Basin? 14 appropriately.
15 A. Atchafalaya Basin. E-99 test. 15 A. Okay.
16 Q. There you go. Okay? Just tell me, in 16 Q. Because no, I'm not -- I'm using
17 the Corps' opinion, isn't what happened in that 17 underseepage, as you put it, the way I refer to
18 test exactly what happened at the Lower Nine 18 it, which is seepage coming through another
19 north breach? 19 source other than from the top.
20 A. The wall deflection with the 20 Is underseepage from below? Okay, the
21 development of the crack was observed in the 21 strata underneath the sheet pile tip, was that
22 E-99 test. The deflection was not as great as 22 a mechanism of failure?
23 what happened in the Ninth Ward on the north 23 A. That was not a contributing factor to
24 side. But a crack, a displacement, a 24 the failure.
25 horizontal displacement at the ground line was 25 Q. Okay. All right. This is Plaintiffs'
Page 195 Page 197
1 noted in E-99. 1 Exhibit 13, and these do have some Bates
2 Q. Okay. Does the Corps regard the 2 numbers on them from the government, for a
3 failure at the Lower Nine north breach to be 3 change. This is NCS 007277, 278, 279, and
4 the same mechanism of failure that was 4 007252, 253, 254, and 255. Okay. Here you go.
5 experienced at the 17th Street Canal? 5 (Tendering.)
6 MR. STONE: 6 MR. BRUNO:
7 Objection. Not within the scope 7 Richard, you saw those at the
8 of your requests. 8 depo of, um --
9 MR. BRUNO: 9 MR. STONE:
10 Subject to the objection. 10 Yes. Just looking at them again.
11 A. The failure at the 17th Street Canal 11 Thank you.
12 initiated with the wall deflecting in the 12 (Exhibit 13 was marked for
13 excess pressure, but the method of failure at 13 identification and is attached hereto.)
14 the 17th Street Canal was an actually sliding 14 A. Okay.
15 effect, a block type sliding effect. And this 15 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
16 took place on a, either in a very, very weak 16 Q. All right. This, as you can see, is
17 clay strata or in an organic clay strata. 17 from Jim Montegut to Guillory.
18 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 18 A. Correct.
19 Q. All right. 19 Q. You know about Guillory. He says,
20 A. But it was a seam, a very weak seam, 20 take a look at Wink's cross-section of the
21 and there was a block translation at 17th 21 PT -- of the pit, I'm sorry -- taken last week,
22 Street. 22 assuming I plotted our design temp correctly,
23 The failure at the -- in the Ninth 23 the roadside pits fall within the allowable
24 Ward on the north side was more of a blowout 24 cut. The canal bank pit is a different story.
25 rotational failure where it popped up early. 25 Also note its current depth. Did you assume
50 (Pages 194 to 197)
Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285
GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 198 Page 200
1 -12 or did you actually measure? 1 it had -- that design was not included in the
2 So here Montegut is asking Guillory 2 document.
3 for some information about the borrow pit. 3 Q. All right. And the design in question
4 A. Correct. 4 is a borrow pit which goes to -12.
5 Q. And here's Exhibit 14, which I just 5 A. Okay. Are these both the same, for
6 gave the Bates numbers to, and here is 6 the same thing?
7 Satterlee responding to Guillory. 7 Q. Yes.
8 (Exhibit 14 was marked for 8 A. Okay, this is the same borrow pit as
9 identification and is attached hereto.) 9 what that is?
10 A. No -- well, actually going through the 10 Q. You can read it yourself.
11 chief of construction division, attention Lee 11 A. I'm asking. I don't know.
12 Guillory. Okay. 12 Q. It's McDonogh. It's a 16-foot pit.
13 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 13 He makes a reference there.
14 Q. All right. And then on the back is 14 A. Okay.
15 something from Miles to, looks like Vicksburg. 15 Q. All right?
16 (Tendering.) 16 A. Got it.
17 A. Memorandum to Chief of Engineering 17 Q. Now, so the first thing we can
18 Division. He sent it to Chief of Engineering 18 conclude is that if there is this, um --
19 Division, CEMVN -- Attention CEMVN, Corps of 19 line -- what's it called again?
20 Engineers Mississippi Valley New Orleans 20 A. Minimum control line.
21 Engineering Division Foundation Branch. 21 Q. If there's a minimum control line,
22 Q. Okay. So this is going -- I was just 22 it's not as deep as 25 feet. That's for sure.
23 trying -- is there some way I can figure out 23 Right? Because --
24 who is writing this and who is it to? 24 A. The minimum control --
25 A. Okay. This document is from Jim 25 Q. It's pit 16.
Page 199 Page 201
1 Miles. Okay? To the chief of engineering 1 A. The minimum control line is a function
2 division. Okay? Knowing that it should go to 2 of distance -- depth versus distance.
3 someone in the foundations branch. 3 Q. All right.
4 Q. I see. 4 A. Okay? So at whatever this point is,
5 A. So Jim Miles -- this goes to Jerry 5 he has a stability line right here --
6 Satterlee desk. After Jerry Satterlee sees it 6 Q. Right.
7 it goes to the chief of geotech branch. 7 A. -- that he's allowed to have. And if
8 Q. Got you. All right. 8 you look at that, you can see it's right up
9 And so he is saying the 32-acre tract 9 against the wall. Okay?
10 of land designated as the East Bank Industrial 10 Q. Well, actually the pit is away from
11 Area is currently undergoing demolition and 11 the wall.
12 site remediation. He says, construction 12 A. No. The section that he's showing
13 requests your office's assistance in evaluating 13 right here.
14 two things. So this is the kind of piece of 14 Q. Yeah.
15 paper you would expect from the construction 15 A. The section he's showing right here,
16 division to the engineering division if they 16 okay, this is his design template. This is how
17 wanted to evaluate something like a hole next 17 much you can dig, and that is the wall right
18 to a flood protection structure, right? 18 there. So you could actually theoretically dig
19 A. If it wasn't covered in the 19 all the way up to that point right there.
20 document -- in the initial document itself. 20 MR. TREEBY:
21 Q. Okay. All right. Well, can we assume 21 Could we get some designation of
22 that the subject of this memo was not covered 22 that specific page and markings of
23 in the original construction document itself 23 what the witness is saying? It's just
24 because he's in fact asking for assistance? 24 hard, on the deposition, to say what
25 A. He's asking for it, so I assume that 25 he's referring to.
51 (Pages 198 to 201)
Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285
GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 202 Page 204
1 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 1 Q. Richard 's point is well taken.
2 Q. Let's back up and clarify, then. 2 They're evaluating all four slopes. Okay?
3 First of all, this cross-section goes 3 The point is that not only looking at
4 through the levee, right? 4 the location which is about -- I mean, you've
5 A. I'm assuming this is the embankment 5 got the roadway there, how wide is the roadway,
6 right there. You see right here. Isn't 6 about ten feet, plus another ten feet, that's
7 that -- 7 twenty feet from the center line of the levee.
8 Q. I cannot be sure is my problem. 8 A. Uh-huh.
9 A. I mean, it's showing an elevation 5 at 9 Q. And then you've got this long distance
10 that point right there. 10 where the hole is, right?
11 Q. I don't know that we can make that 11 A. (Nods affirmatively.)
12 conclusion is the problem. I really -- no, 12 Q. Okay. Do we agree they're not simply
13 this is better one. This shows -- all right. 13 evaluating a location twenty feet from the
14 Document Number 007279 seems to show a 14 levee crest, they're evaluating the entire
15 chain-link fence, a floodwall, as well as a 15 hole?
16 base line. Let's see if that assists you in 16 A. Got it.
17 figuring out where this is relative to the 17 Q. Okay. Now, I don't know about you,
18 floodwall. 18 but there doesn't seem to be a way for me to
19 A. Okay. 19 calculate how big the hole is, length and width
20 Q. All right? Now, this hole goes all 20 across the surface.
21 the way out to here, which is the extreme left 21 A. Other than putting a scale on it?
22 hand of the page. Right? 22 Q. Okay. Now, so they're asking -- take
23 A. Uh-huh. 23 a look at 07254. It says borrow pit.
24 Q. So it's not right up against the 24 MR. TREEBY:
25 floodwall, it's some distance out. 25 Part of Exhibit --
Page 203 Page 205
1 A. Let's see. It's maybe ten foot out. 1 MR. BRUNO:
2 Q. This side of the hole is a lot further 2 14.
3 away than ten foot. 3 A. Okay.
4 A. No, no. The start of the cut. 4 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
5 Q. I understand. 5 Q. It's a big hole.
6 A. Okay. I understand. 6 A. (Nods affirmatively.)
7 Q. The evaluation is for the whole cut, 7 Q. It goes all the way out almost to the
8 not just for a part of the cut. All right? 8 water.
9 A. Okay. 9 A. Correct.
10 Q. I mean, it says it in black and white 10 Q. Okay. So we're not talking about
11 on the first page of the document. 11 something that's real close to the flood
12 A. I understand. 12 control structure, we're talking about
13 Q. They're evaluating both slopes of the 13 something that goes all way out to the canal.
14 borrow pit; right? 14 A. Okay.
15 A. Correct. 15 Q. All right. So we've established that,
16 Q. So obviously they're evaluating the 16 right?
17 slope that's closer to the water as well as the 17 Now, next question: What Mr. Miles
18 slope that's closer to the levee. 18 wants to know, from the engineering department,
19 MR. STONE: 19 is he wants engineering office assistance in
20 Actually, I believe they're 20 evaluating the following two items --
21 evaluating all four slopes. 21 A. Okay.
22 MR. BRUNO: 22 Q. -- such that the remedial action can
23 Fair enough. They're evaluating 23 be accomplished in compliance with NODs
24 all four -- 24 geotechnical engineering principles and
25 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 25 practice. Okay?
52 (Pages 202 to 205)
Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285
GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 206 Page 208
1 A. Okay. 1 with the back side?
2 Q. First thing he wants to do is he wants 2 Q. Because it's a 16-foot hole in an area
3 to evaluate the structural stability of the 3 within 300 feet of a levee protection
4 hole. Right? 4 structure. I thought we established this
5 A. Correct. 5 morning that when you're digging holes within
6 Q. And to get to the bottom line, he's 6 300 feet of a flood protection structure your
7 concerned because he doesn't want the hole to 7 local New Orleans District office requires
8 fall in on top of somebody. Right? That's the 8 engineering to do an evaluation as to whether
9 structural stability component. 9 or not that hole --
10 MR. STONE: 10 A. And did engineering do that
11 Objection. The witness may not 11 evaluation? I'm showing you right here.
12 know from his personal knowledge 12 Look --
13 what's in the mind of the requester, 13 Q. Wait. My question is -- we're not
14 but -- 14 there yet. I'm going to let you --
15 A. It's probably twofold. He doesn't 15 A. Okay. Fine.
16 want the hole to fall in on someone, and he 16 Q. I'm just asking this: Shouldn't he
17 doesn't want the back side of the hole to fail 17 have asked -- Mr. Miles -- for them to evaluate
18 and progress closer to the wall and jeopardize 18 the entire hole, not just one part of the hole,
19 the stability. 19 to be consistent with the testimony you gave us
20 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 20 this morning?
21 Q. Fair enough. All right. 21 A. I would think that Mr. Miles as chief
22 So he says, see attached plan. He 22 of engineering division -- I mean as chief of
23 says, provide a stability control line with 23 construction division asked engineering to do
24 respect to eastern side of the borrow area. 24 their job.
25 Right? 25 Q. All right.
Page 207 Page 209
1 A. Uh-huh. 1 A. And I would believe that engineering
2 Q. Now, he's not asking for a stability 2 did their job and looked at both sides.
3 control line on the western side. 3 Q. Excellent. Okay. That's fine. Now,
4 A. Okay. 4 then he says, evaluate the structural stability
5 Q. Should he have? 5 of the proposed Surekote Road remedial soil
6 A. I guess I don't understand what 6 excavation three feet deep by twenty-five feet
7 difference it would make. 7 wide, and less than fifteen -- or about fifteen
8 Q. Okay. Well, I guess what I'm -- is he 8 feet from the adjacent Jourdan Avenue floodwall
9 only asking them to evaluate the east side of 9 levee. So this is a second place.
10 the borrow pit and he's not asking them to 10 A. (Nods affirmatively.)
11 evaluate the west side? 11 Q. And he wants a stability control line,
12 A. Well, the west side of the borrow pit 12 and assess whether the construction division
13 is far away from the flood protection. 13 and the contractor should utilize a sheeting,
14 Q. Right. But it's within 300 feet. We 14 shoring or bracing system to safely accomplish
15 have got your picture. There it is right 15 this soil excavation.
16 there. 16 So he's asking now about a second
17 A. But what he's asking for is he wants 17 thing. This thing is only three feet deep, but
18 to make sure that this is stable with respect 18 it's about fifteen feet from the floodwall.
19 to the floodwall. 19 A. Okay.
20 Q. No, I'm with you. I got all that. 20 Q. Now, so my first question to you is,
21 What I'm -- it's a different question. 21 so is it -- it's obviously the case, then, that
22 I know that. We're not asking about what he is 22 something as shallow as three feet but that
23 asking about, I'm asking now about what he's 23 close to the floodwall could potentially cause
24 not asking about. 24 damage?
25 A. Okay. But why would he be concerned 25 A. It's a possibility. I mean, what
53 (Pages 206 to 209)
Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285
GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 210 Page 212
1 Mr. Miles is asking is for engineering to 1 MR. BRUNO:
2 examine this excavation, and engineering 2 We'll do it. Get it right. I
3 examined the excavation with respect to the 3 want this right.
4 stability of the wall. 4 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
5 Q. All right. Now, okay. You'll 5 Q. Okay. Now, but you're right, he's
6 remember I said shouldn't Mr. Miles have asked 6 doing his job, he's doing the analysis that the
7 about the western side of the wall? You said, 7 construction chief asked him to do. In fact he
8 well, I don't know, but they should have. 8 went beyond --
9 Well, here's the memo where Mr. Satterlee who 9 A. Correct.
10 is chief of the engineering division says -- 10 Q. -- what the construction chief --
11 A. Okay. 11 because he knew he had to evaluate both sides
12 Q. Although analysis was not requested -- 12 of that borrow pit, right?
13 A. Okay. 13 A. Correct.
14 Q. -- it should be noted that the 14 Q. Okay. Now, let's go through his
15 proposed 16-foot deep McDonogh Marine borrow 15 answers. Number 1: As per your request in the
16 area with respect to the western side is not 16 15 April '2 memo, the section forwarded were
17 stable. He says that. 17 analyzed for stability. And we've talked about
18 A. Okay. 18 that this morning. That's that wall stability
19 Q. Okay. Now -- 19 analysis and that's also that global stability
20 A. So engineering did their job. 20 analysis.
21 Q. That's exactly my point. 21 A. Correct.
22 A. Okay. 22 Q. Okay. They didn't do a seepage
23 Q. And somebody scratched it out. Right? 23 analysis. Right? At least there is nothing
24 You see a line? I didn't put that line. 24 reflected that they did.
25 Do you know who put that line? 25 A. I would consider that part of
Page 211 Page 213
1 A. I have no idea who put that line. 1 stability. When we talk about stability we're
2 Q. No idea. Okay. That's fine. Now, 2 talking about wall stability and global
3 but this is the way it came to me from 3 stability of which seepage is part of.
4 Mr. Stone, with a line through it. 4 Q. Thank you, that's fine.
5 MR. STONE: 5 The proposed Surekote Road remedial
6 I didn't do that line. 6 soil excavation, that's that 3-foot deep by
7 MR. BRUNO: 7 25-foot wide, and about 15 feet from the
8 That's okay. You can't run from 8 adjacent Jourdan Avenue floodwall levee, did
9 that line, man. If I'm you, I'd run. 9 not present a stability problem.
10 MR. STONE: 10 A. Okay.
11 I don't know why it matters. 11 Q. He says, don't worry about it.
12 MR. TREEBY: 12 The proposed 16 feet deep McDonogh
13 I confess. I did it. 13 Marine borrow area did present a stability
14 MR. BRUNO: 14 problem with respect to the eastern side of the
15 You know what? If there's one 15 borrow area. Various options were analyzed and
16 believable thing that ever came out of 16 are shown on the enclosures. Which I don't
17 your mouth, that's it. 17 see. Do you? Any other options?
18 MR. TREEBY: 18 A. Okay. Let me just tell you, that's
19 Can I see the document a minute? 19 not how an enclosure would have been sent out
20 MR. BRUNO: 20 of geotech branch. National Rent 100 North
21 Can I finish my 21 Suite, you don't have the enclosure.
22 cross-examination? 22 Q. No sweat. That's fine.
23 MR. TREEBY: 23 A. That's what I'm telling you.
24 I think you misread something. 24 Q. We get what we get through the good
25 No, no. I'll look at it later. 25 graces of learned opposing counsel Rich Stone,
54 (Pages 210 to 213)
Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285
GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 214 Page 216
1 so. 1 documents. You take the back of the shovel and
2 A. You know -- see, what happens is, it 2 you beat it a few times. Which one compacts
3 says two enclosures. 3 the soil more?
4 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 4 A. The Proctor gives you an
5 Q. Right. 5 identification of what the compaction is.
6 A. Okay? And this is, there's two 6 Q. It's a specification.
7 enclosures that came with this. Okay? You 7 A. Right.
8 should have four enclosures, as stated. 8 Q. And the other one is?
9 Q. Right. Right. 9 A. And what we have here is an end
10 A. So you don't have -- 10 result. And what you had in the other one is
11 Q. I'm with you. 11 what's called a methods spec.
12 A. Okay. Got it. 12 Q. Right.
13 Q. You see this Bates number thing here? 13 A. You told him how to do something.
14 A. Uh-huh. 14 Q. Right. So why wouldn't you just tell
15 Q. See? That's put on there by the 15 them in this piece of paper here, just get your
16 government. And that says 255 Nations Rent, 16 backhoe and just beat it a little bit? Why
17 and there's 254. So I'm with you. So not my 17 would you, as an engineer, give somebody this
18 fault. 18 very specific spec, 12-inch lifts of 90 percent
19 But in any case, back to the document. 19 Proctor compacted backfill with +5 percent and
20 So Number 3: Says 12-inch lists of 90 percent 20 -2 percent optimum water content? It's a very
21 Proctor compacted backfill within +5 percent 21 specific spec, isn't it?
22 and -3 percent optimum water content prior to 22 A. That's a standard semi-compacted --
23 compacting is recommended. 23 you know, he could have called that
24 What does that mean? 24 semi-compacted fill and everybody know what
25 A. That means that they're putting the 25 that is.
Page 215 Page 217
1 material back in what is classically called 1 Q. All right. Why that spec; what does
2 semi-compacted fill. Every type of fill has a 2 this spec do?
3 naturally occurring moisture content, its 3 A. My guess is he was worried about
4 optimum moisture content. We're allowing you 4 semi-compacted fill because it was near surface
5 to put material a little bit wetter or a little 5 and he was worried about erodibility. You're
6 bit drier. You put it in in whatever it was, 6 going to get a bunch of rainfall coming off
7 12-inch lifts, 24-inch lifts, and compact it by 7 that embankment of the levee and be washing
8 some methodology, you know, rolling a dozer 8 through there, you'd end up getting ruts and
9 over it, hire cows to walk over it, whatever, 9 stuff like that if you would put the material
10 until such time as it has a density that's 10 in real loose. This way it's going in at close
11 what's called 90 percent Proctor. Proctor is a 11 to its natural moisture content.
12 laboratory type test that you use to get 12 Q. All right. Well, is he talking about
13 compaction. 13 the three-foot hole or is he talking about the
14 Q. Right. 14 16-foot hole?
15 A. And if the Proctor of this soil is 15 A. Okay. There's another document that's
16 100 pounds per cubic foot, if you do the 16 floating around someplace. Is it here?
17 Proctor, then we're saying, you go out there 17 Q. Right. Well, not with this group.
18 and you perform mechanical energy transmitted 18 A. Out of geotech. No, out of geotech,
19 into that soil, dozers, sheepsfoot roller, 19 that Jim Gately --
20 until you get 90 percent density. 20 MR. STONE:
21 Q. Right. 21 13.
22 A. So if it was 100-pound Proctor, 90 22 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
23 percent would be a 90-pound. 23 Q. Yeah. But I mean that's the original
24 Q. Okay. Compare this, this 90 percent 24 request.
25 Proctor to what we saw on some of the other 25 A. We had one with Gately 's name on it,
55 (Pages 214 to 217)
Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285
GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 218 Page 220
1 I think? 1 Now, the questions that we have here
2 Q. Are we missing a number? Here's my 2 aren't covered by these engineering
3 12, my 13, my 14. I'm sorry. Mr. Grieshaber, 3 considerations, so Jim Miles came back and
4 I don't know -- I will -- 4 said, Mr. Satterlee, I've got a question.
5 (Brief recess.) 5 Okay? So it went back into engineering.
6 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 6 MR. STONE:
7 Q. All right. Let's mark this document 7 Let's mark that document as the
8 as Plaintiffs' Exhibit Number 15. This is 8 next exhibit so that you have it.
9 what's been provided to us by counsel for the 9 MR. BRUNO:
10 government, and it contains, in addition to 10 I did.
11 Bates numbered document NCS 7252, and NCS 11 MR. STONE:
12 document 253, and NCS document 254, and NCS 12 Is it 15?
13 document 255, another document which is an 13 MR. BRUNO:
14 E-mail from Jean Spadaro to Lee Guillory which 14 Yeah. And I already indicated
15 then contains another E-mail from Jim Gately to 15 the differences between 14 and 15.
16 Jean Spadaro, and then apparently attaches to 16 Okay? You have one new document which
17 this a letter with a variety of information. 17 we've been talking about.
18 So let me show this to you and see if 18 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
19 that helps you answer the question. 19 Q. Now, first of all it says Ms. Spadaro.
20 (Exhibit 15 was marked for 20 Do we know who she is?
21 identification and is attached hereto.) 21 A. I think she works in construction
22 A. Okay, what is the question? It was a 22 division, but I'm not positive.
23 long time ago. 23 Q. It says, requesting geotech input to
24 Q. Yeah, I know. I'm sorry. The 24 the above-named contract. So obviously they're
25 question was whether or not Paragraph 3 of 25 talking about the TERC contract, right?
Page 219 Page 221
1 Exhibit 15 -- I'm sorry. Paragraph 3 of 1 A. Correct.
2 Exhibit 14, Bates NCS 7252, referred to the 2 Q. Now, you think there are more of
3 three-foot depth hole or the borrow pit. We're 3 these?
4 talking about backfill specifications. 4 A. I don't see why there would be. I
5 MR. TREEBY: 5 mean, that's pretty inclusive of the question.
6 Are there Bates numbers on those 6 They probably met on excavation issues with
7 new pages? 7 that contract looking for guidance, and the
8 MR. BRUNO: 8 geotech branch put together guidance that could
9 No, Bill. That's why I just went 9 be universally applied.
10 through the exercise that I did. 10 Q. Okay. All right. It says -- there's
11 A. What we have here is what I referred 11 no guide -- there's no line in here, is there?
12 to earlier as the engineering considerations. 12 A. No. But it's in the text of it. Read
13 When the contract was getting ready, 13 it.
14 okay, engineering division went to a meeting, 14 Q. All right. It says, after any
15 okay, on the 8th of September, 2000, and they 15 excavation or soil displacement on the canal
16 were requesting input into this contract, and 16 bank or above or below, the waterline has been
17 they came in and they made these 17 completed, the contractor shall finish the
18 recommendations which construction division has 18 slope to a 1 vertical on 3 horizontal.
19 in hand. 19 A. In other words, all excavations have
20 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 20 to be finaled out at 1 on 3s.
21 Q. Right. 21 Q. All right. Additionally, the
22 A. And they, when they get -- when 22 contractor shall provide compliance surveys to
23 there's a question and the question is answered 23 the contracting office showing that this has
24 by the engineering considerations, it wouldn't 24 been accomplished. Okay?
25 come back. 25 B: Any excavations deeper than 3 feet
56 (Pages 218 to 221)
Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285
GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 222 Page 224
1 shall have the slopes cut on a 1 vertical on 3 1 A. No. On this issue, on anything to
2 horizontal slope. Right? 2 deal with that list of --
3 A. Correct. 3 Q. Oh. That list.
4 Q. Now, that obviously doesn't pertain to 4 A. Right.
5 cofferdam structures. Right? 5 Q. But can we assume that this list
6 A. Not braced cofferdams, no. There was 6 addresses all of the Task Order No. 26?
7 a separate submittal and review of a braced 7 A. That is something that can be used by
8 cofferdam. 8 construction division to answer questions. If
9 Q. Right. Indicating that that's the 9 you look at this one over here, you know, they
10 kind of thing which has to be re reviewed. 10 were coming in and they were asking could they
11 A. Correct. 11 use a 1 on 1-1/2. Okay?
12 Q. Stockpiles that will be no more than 12 Q. Uh-huh.
13 five feet above the surrounding terrain, and 13 A. Because the 1 on 3 obviously wouldn't
14 shall be placed no closer than 20 feet from the 14 get them what they needed. So they had to come
15 edge of the excavation. Right? 15 back and ask again. But as long as they met
16 A. (Nods affirmatively.) 16 the engineering considerations in that
17 Q. Soil used to backfill any of the 17 E-mail --
18 excavations shall be compacted to density of 18 Q. All right.
19 the existing soil, right? 19 A. -- they can make their own calls.
20 A. (Nods affirmatively.) 20 MR. BRUNO:
21 Q. E: When the fence posts are removed, 21 For the record, Bill, he just
22 the soil used the backfill shall be the soil 22 referred the Number 13.
23 that was removed or sand brought up to the 23 MR. TREEBY:
24 existing grade and hand tamped to the density 24 Thanks.
25 of the surrounding terrain. Right? 25 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
Page 223 Page 225
1 A. (Nods affirmatively.) 1 Q. There's no --
2 Q. The contractor shall smooth the finish 2 A. Well, the minimum control line that he
3 surface and slope to drain so that the surface 3 gave you --
4 water will drain freely to the canal and not 4 Q. There is no minimum control line in
5 cause ponding of the runoff. 5 here.
6 The minimum elevation that the 6 A. -- is the 1 on 3.
7 contractor should dress the area is 3 feet 7 Q. That's for your slope.
8 NGVD. It gives us your datum now. 8 A. Right.
9 A. For the three feet, yes. 9 Q. He's not giving you a control line for
10 Q. Right. The contractor should cut the 10 depth. Hole depth.
11 bank to no closer than 260 feet as measured 11 A. So you'd have to come back to
12 perpendicular to the existing wall. I'm sorry. 12 engineering division.
13 The contractor should cut the bank to no closer 13 Q. Exactly. That's all I was trying to
14 than 260 feet as measured perpendicular to the 14 establish.
15 existing floodwall. 3: The POC is Jim Gately, 15 A. Okay.
16 Extension 2980. 16 Q. So the holes that we talked about this
17 First: POC is point of contact? 17 morning and after lunch, at the Boland site and
18 A. Point of contact. 18 at the Saucer site, those holes should have
19 Q. So if I've got an engineering 19 been addressed by separate memo directed to the
20 question, I call Jim? 20 engineering division.
21 A. On this issue, yeah. He was in 21 A. Or they were addressed in the actual
22 geotech at the time. He's since left geotech. 22 task order. I don't know which.
23 Q. But on this issue, is he the geotech 23 Q. Well, the task order didn't
24 engineering guy on all geotech issues on this 24 contemplate, you'll remember, those holes
25 contract? 25 because the holes came up later when they
57 (Pages 222 to 225)
Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285
GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 226 Page 228
1 discovered these structures below. Okay? 1 for the levee board since it's their floodwall?
2 A. Okay. 2 A. Am I doing what?
3 Q. All right. Can you explain to me why 3 Q. This evaluation of the holes to
4 there would be any need to -- this business 4 determine whether or not there's a potential
5 with the fence posts -- why you have to 5 for harm.
6 backfill, you know, when you pull the fence 6 A. I'm guaranteeing that the work is not
7 posts out? 7 impacting the flood protection.
8 A. Safety issue. Somebody step in it, 8 Q. Okay.
9 break an ankle. 9 A. Okay?
10 Q. It has nothing to do with erosion? 10 Q. Regardless who owns it.
11 A. (Shakes head negatively.) No. It's 11 A. Correct.
12 strictly given them guidance on how to 12 Q. Fair enough.
13 backfill. You don't have to put concrete in 13 Now, just one more document. This is
14 it, you don't have to put grout in it, just put 14 WGI 262218. What's highlighted in pink there
15 the in situ material right back in. 15 talks about the fact that groundwater flow has
16 Q. All right. Okay. I'm sorry. Who is 16 changed over time as before remediation and
17 Spadaro again? You told me this and it just 17 after remediation. And you'll see before
18 went in one ear and out the other. Is she 18 remediation groundwater flow is going both
19 still with the Corps? 19 ways, and after remediation, at least that memo
20 A. I think she's remarried. She 20 says, groundwater flow is going away from the
21 married -- 21 canal toward the floodwall.
22 Q. All right. But she's not here? 22 You see that?
23 A. I don't know if she's still with the 23 A. Okay. I'm in the process of reading
24 Corps or not. I really don't. 24 it a second time.
25 Q. Okay. Let's take a break. I think I 25 Q. Right.
Page 227 Page 229
1 might be done. 1 A. I just don't understand who this is --
2 (Brief recess.) 2 who is this from? Who is --
3 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 3 Q. I'm not going to ask you to believe
4 Q. All right. Just a few more questions, 4 that it's accurate. Okay?
5 Mr. Grieshaber. 5 A. No, I'm just asking, who is MMG?
6 A. Sure. 6 MR. JOANEN:
7 Q. Now, the Orleans Levee District is the 7 Materials Management Group.
8 local sponsoring agency for that floodwall, 8 A. It says, I think the basis for MMG 's
9 right? 9 soil DF --
10 A. Correct. 10 MR. JOANEN:
11 Q. All right. And when you do work 11 Dilution factor.
12 around that floodwall, you're required to get a 12 MR. STONE:
13 permit from them. 13 Okay.
14 MR. STONE: 14 MR. BRUNO:
15 Objection. It's not within the 15 He knows some stuff.
16 categories that you've asked for here 16 MR. STONE:
17 for this deposition. 17 But where are you getting this?
18 MR. BRUNO: 18 MR. BRUNO:
19 Okay. 19 A lot of reading, writing and
20 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 20 arithmetic.
21 Q. I guess the reason I'm asking, you're 21 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
22 the guy who's designate on the potential for 22 Q. Again, I'm not asking you to --
23 harm to the floodwall. I just want to know if 23 A. Okay. No, I understand.
24 the levee board comes into this at all. Are 24 Q. The question I'm going to ask you,
25 you doing this for you or are you doing this 25 Mr. Grieshaber --
58 (Pages 226 to 229)
Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285
GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 230 Page 232
1 A. Okay. Make it easy. 1 varies anywhere from 3 to 0, so there are times
2 Q. Yeah. I'm not testing you on this, 2 when groundwater will flow from the canal into
3 okay? I don't know if it's true or false. But 3 the aquifer, there is time when water flows out
4 I'm just wondering, if in fact the groundwater 4 of the aquifer into the canal.
5 flow is changing from going both ways to going 5 Q. Right.
6 away from the canal to the floodwall, doesn't 6 A. So to say that there is groundwater
7 that mean that the groundwater flow is going 7 flow in only one direction in that aquifer is
8 underneath the sheet pile tip? Because if the 8 not consistent. So I can't see how you can
9 sheet pile tip were blocking the groundwater 9 tell me the groundwater is only flowing in one
10 flow there would be no continuous flow, it 10 direction when the recharge is in fact the
11 would run into the wall and stop. 11 canal.
12 MR. STONE: 12 Q. Well, unless the water is going under
13 Objection. 13 the sheet pile.
14 A. Well, I mean, sheet pile has what's 14 A. But eventually it has -- when the
15 called interlock leakage. 15 canal is at 3, the water flows and maybe it
16 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 16 goes toward the sheet pile. When the canal is
17 Q. Right. 17 at 0, then the water flows out.
18 A. So there is flow that takes place 18 Q. Yeah.
19 through the interlocks. 19 A. So there's no reason to believe that
20 Q. Some. 20 it's ever crossing the sheet pile.
21 A. Um -- but if in fact the groundwater 21 Q. Here's your problem: Your assumption
22 flow is going away from the canal, which I'm 22 is that the land on the other side of the
23 not sure there's buy-in, it doesn't sound like 23 floodwall is higher than the low tide, if you
24 Mr. Bacuta buys in on it. 24 will, of the Industrial Canal. And you'll
25 Q. Again, I didn't ask you to accept it 25 remember there's a canal bottom there just like
Page 231 Page 233
1 now. I don't want to get into no big argument. 1 at the 17th Street Canal, where the street
2 Because I don't have a clue whether he's 2 level is lower than the low tide of the 17th
3 accurate or not. I'm just asking a real simple 3 Street Canal where you had people reporting
4 question. 4 water in their yards for a whole year before
5 Doesn't that mean that if water flow 5 any hurricane.
6 is going away from the canal it's going 6 MR. STONE:
7 underneath the sheet pile tip? 7 There's no question pending.
8 MR. STONE: 8 MR. BRUNO:
9 Then the objection is that you're 9 You know, if you would just allow
10 asking the witness about facts that 10 me the courtesy of finishing my
11 you don't even consider necessarily 11 question you will then learn a lot, of
12 relevant to the case. So. 12 course, and then you will learn
13 MR. BRUNO: 13 whether or not there's a question
14 What? Are you crazy? Are you 14 attached.
15 out of your mind? You must be crazy. 15 MR. TREEBY:
16 Of course it's relevant to the case. 16 Uh-huh.
17 MR. STONE: 17 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO:
18 I object. 18 Q. So the fact is, Mr. Grieshaber, if the
19 MR. BRUNO: 19 land on the protected side of the floodwall is
20 Good Lord. Of course it's 20 lower than the height of the water at low tide,
21 relevant to the case. My goodness. 21 if you will, and the water's continually
22 A. Okay. Let me give you a long answer. 22 flowing out, that means the water is going
23 Underwater flow is a function of head, it flows 23 underneath the sheet pile tip, isn't that true?
24 from a higher head to a lower head. The IHNC 24 MR. TREEBY:
25 canal is tied to Lake Pontchartrain which 25 Objection to the form of the
59 (Pages 230 to 233)
Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285
GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 234 Page 236
1 question. 1 and the high tide is up there, your aquifer
2 MR. STONE: 2 theory --
3 Objection. 3 A. It's all a function of head. Okay?
4 MR. BRUNO: 4 What this piezometer reads close enough to this
5 Yeah. 5 is going to be whatever this elevation is.
6 A. I'm going to have to draw you a 6 Q. Right.
7 picture. 7 A. When this elevation is +3, the water
8 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 8 is going to go this way. When this goes to low
9 Q. I knew you would. 9 tide, the water is going to come back. Water
10 A. And I really apologize -- 10 seeks its own level.
11 MR. BRUNO: 11 Q. Yeah.
12 No. That's fine. Let's mark it, 12 A. Okay. You agree right here on the
13 too, exhibit the next. 13 surface --
14 MR. JOANEN: 14 Q. On the surface of what?
15 17. 15 A. -- on the surface of the canal, that
16 (Exhibit 17 was marked for 16 if I have a drop of water right here, when the
17 identification and is attached hereto.) 17 tide is high the water is flowing in, when the
18 A. Okay. You're telling me there's a 18 tide drops, the water flows out.
19 canal. Okay, we've got sheet pile. 19 Q. Well, except that it assumes that this
20 EXAMINATION BY MR. BRUNO: 20 pipe, if you will, is at the same height of the
21 Q. Right. 21 surface of the water. And no one is suggesting
22 A. And someplace down here is a 22 that it is.
23 water-bearing strata -- 23 A. No. I've got this as an aquifer,
24 Q. Yep. 24 okay, a confined aquifer.
25 A. -- that you're talking about. 25 Q. It's below --
Page 235 Page 237
1 Q. Right. 1 A. It's below the ground. And if you put
2 A. Okay. If we put a piezometer, or we 2 a piezometer, you're reading +3. You're
3 read what the head is right here -- 3 reading whatever this canal --
4 Q. Underneath the ground. 4 Q. +3 means what?
5 A. -- underneath the ground. 5 A. In elevation. +3NGV. Whatever, Lake
6 Q. Uh-huh. 6 Pontchartrain levee.
7 A. Okay? And we put another piezometer 7 Q. What's the difference in tide, about a
8 right here that measures the head -- right? 8 foot?
9 When the canal is up here at +3 the water is 9 A. Well, anywhere between 3 feet --
10 going to be flowing in this direction. 10 between 3 and 0 is the tidal range down there.
11 Q. Uh-huh. 11 Q. All right. If at 0 it's above the
12 A. If it stays up here long enough, this 12 hole, you're telling me it's not going to force
13 is going to get to be +3. Okay? 13 water into the hole --
14 And this over here is going to get -- 14 A. No, because --
15 just for talking purposes, +2 because of the 15 Q. -- on the other side?
16 head loss to get to this point. 16 A. -- this is a confined aquifer.
17 Q. Okay. 17 Q. Yes.
18 A. Low tide comes along. Now, the canal 18 A. Okay? The pressure in this aquifer
19 is reading 0. 19 equals the pressure in this canal.
20 Q. Okay. 20 Q. Okay.
21 A. This drop of water that was right here 21 A. If you believe that there's intimate
22 doesn't go this way, it's going back that way. 22 contact here, which you apparently do --
23 Q. Mr. Grieshaber, suppose -- 23 Q. Right.
24 A. This is basic aquifer theory. 24 A. -- then the pressure here is equal to
25 Q. Except that if the low tide is up here 25 the pressure in the canal.
60 (Pages 234 to 237)
Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285
GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 238 Page 240
1 Q. Okay. 1 Q. All right. So that means that there's
2 A. So when the pressure in the canal goes 2 a layer of soil which is permeable enough to
3 down from high tide, water flows back out. 3 allow that water to travel through. Right?
4 Q. So that that means that every time 4 A. Correct.
5 it's high tide you're going to get water in 5 Q. Okay. All right.
6 people's backyards. 6 MR. TREEBY:
7 A. No, because there's head loss going 7 Can I see the document?
8 in. What I'm trying to explain to you is, you 8 MR. BRUNO:
9 cannot tell me that there's flow only going in 9 That's all I've got. And we will
10 one direction, and that's what that E-mail is 10 reserve any redirect that may be
11 stating. 11 appropriate after Mr. Treeby conducts
12 Q. All right. 12 his examination.
13 A. It's illogical. 13 MR. FISHER:
14 Q. So you're telling me that it's 14 And this is Robert Fisher for
15 impossible for anybody to have seen, at the 15 Lafarge. We reserve our rights to
16 Lower Ninth Ward, ponding of water on the 16 cross-examine the witness for his
17 protected side? 17 deposition.
18 A. No, that's not what I'm explaining. 18
19 Q. All right. 19
20 A. What I'm explaining is flow in the 20
21 aquifer. 21
22 Q. Okay. 22
23 A. Okay? What that memo is about is flow 23
24 in the aquifer. When you go on the other side 24
25 of that wall, there's a piezometer that shows 25
Page 239 Page 241
1 you the water is higher than the ground line. 1 WITNESS' CERTIFICATE
2 Q. All this says is that at a certain 2
3 point in time, that water is flowing in one 3 I, JOHN GRIESHABER, PH.D., P.E., do
4 direction. 4 hereby certify that the foregoing testimony was
5 A. No, that says it's only flowing in one 5 given by me, and that the transcription of said
6 direction is what you highlighted to me -- 6 testimony, with corrections and/or changes, if
7 Q. Well, we don't know -- 7 any, is true and correct as given by me on the
8 A. -- which is contrary to aquifer 8 aforementioned date.
9 theory. 9
10 Q. Okay. All right. So this -- the fact 10 ______________ _________________________
11 that this piece of paper says flowing one way 11 DATE SIGNED JOHN GRIESHABER, PH.D., P.E.
12 or the other has nothing to do, in your 12
13 opinion, with visualizing water on the 13 _______ Signed with corrections as noted.
14 protected side of the levee? 14
15 A. No, visualizing water on the protected 15 _______ Signed with no corrections noted.
16 side has to do with the excess head that is the 16
17 result of the fact that the water is higher 17
18 than the land. 18
19 Q. All right. So that if you see water 19
20 on the protected side of the levee, and that 20
21 means the water is higher, it also means that 21
22 there's a method by which the water can travel 22
23 underneath the floodwall into the protected 23
24 side. 24
25 A. There's a hydrostatic link, yes. 25 DATE TAKEN: June 27th, 2008

61 (Pages 238 to 241)


Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285
GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 242
1 REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE
2 I, JOSEPH A. FAIRBANKS, JR., CCR, RPR,
3 Certified Court Reporter in and for the State
4 of Louisiana, do hereby certify that the
5 aforementioned witness, after having been first
6 duly sworn by me to testify to the truth, did
7 testify as hereinabove set forth;
8 That said deposition was taken by me
9 in computer shorthand and thereafter
10 transcribed under my supervision, and is a true
11 and correct transcription to the best of my
12 ability and understanding.
13 I further certify that I am not of
14 counsel, nor related to counsel or the parties
15 hereto, and am in no way interested in the
16 result of said cause.
17
18
19
20
21
22
23 ____________________________________
24 JOSEPH A. FAIRBANKS, JR., CCR, RPR
25 CERTIFIED COURT REPORTER #75005

62 (Page 242)
Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285
GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 243

A addition 218:10 air 178:3 analyzed 106:7 applies 43:3


ability 55:7 242:12 additional 110:25 ALFIERI 3:14,20 212:17 213:15 apply 99:3,4,7,8,16
able 23:12 85:17 112:14 113:5 allege 134:4 ancient 49:15 99:22 100:1,2,6
105:15 167:9 169:14 alleviate 138:25 and/or 19:1 75:1 appoint 8:7
above-named Additionally allow 119:12 233:9 241:6 appointed 6:7
220:24 221:21 240:3 Anecdotal 113:13 78:13
absence 113:12 address 98:13 allowable 120:20 ankle 226:9 appreciate 15:12
absent 168:9,17 99:25 120:21 197:23 anomaly 179:23 appropriate 39:13
absolute 85:2 addressed 225:19 allowed 102:12 answer 5:13 7:15 53:24 97:18
absolutely 57:1 225:21 119:11 201:7 7:15 27:4 43:23 113:22 240:11
67:19 84:19 addresses 25:6 allowing 66:8 64:4 71:23 86:1 appropriately
academia 191:19 224:6 215:4 143:13 168:19 196:14
accept 23:9 72:15 adequate 96:15 allows 80:7 176:21 177:2 179:3 approval 163:9
96:17 144:4 adjacent 105:9 alluvial 97:9,14 182:21 183:13 171:7,10
230:25 171:23 176:11 106:20 184:7 185:8 191:1 approve 162:21
acceptable 71:17 209:8 213:8 alternate 33:11 191:3 218:19 170:8 171:17
accepted 164:3 adjourn 45:2 85:15 alternative 33:14 224:8 231:22 approved 129:12
accompanied 115:9 administer 167:11 98:25 answered 64:9 163:25 164:2
accomplish 209:14 administering 5:24 amazing 69:17 121:20 148:7 172:4
accomplished adopted 37:8 ambiguous 80:24 185:5 219:23 approves 163:18
205:23 221:24 advantage 143:4 81:3 answers 85:18 approving 146:14
accurate 37:13 advised 173:9 amendments 10:9 141:14 146:9 approximately
133:12 144:5 affect 60:7 172:6 AMERICA 1:11 212:15 25:21
159:21 179:7 affirmatively 7:7 2:11 anybody 62:14 April 212:16
184:21 185:6 109:22 113:9 amount 104:3 117:3 150:19 aquifer 107:5
229:4 231:3 115:5 155:12 177:6 153:15 238:15 142:23 232:3,4,7
accurately 23:10 159:9 163:23 analyses 124:6 anymore 20:3 235:24 236:1,23
96:17 204:11 205:6 analysis 38:25 85:21 106:14 236:24 237:16,18
accuse 138:10 209:10 222:16,20 39:11,13,15,21 anytime 42:5 238:21,24 239:8
accused 58:3 223:1 40:8,16,25 41:8 anyway 85:22 aquifers 100:16
achieved 41:1 aforementioned 41:23 46:15 50:23 143:3,6 architects 33:6,15
action 1:4 118:5 5:4 241:8 242:5 74:25 75:1 94:13 apologize 82:5 area 19:3 25:6
205:22 agency 227:8 94:14 99:22 106:1 114:4 26:17,18 27:18
active 95:17 176:25 ago 8:9 62:8 76:9 102:12 103:4,6 135:17 234:10 32:4 56:22 103:10
activities 184:2 218:23 104:10,15,16,19 apparently 58:16 105:8 136:19
activity 117:8 agree 18:24 45:22 104:20 105:2,7,12 172:21 218:16 154:17 158:1,1
120:22 172:6 59:21 70:15 71:10 106:10,10,13,13 237:22 159:12 172:24
173:11 99:21 100:2 106:17 117:9 appear 6:8 181:23 182:5
actual 28:1 39:19 106:19,23 175:25 118:6 119:4 appearance 16:24 183:25 192:20
74:22 160:24 185:4,8 204:12 123:13,13,14 APPEARANCES 199:11 206:24
177:8 225:21 236:12 147:25 156:19,19 2:1 208:2 210:16
acute 72:25 agreed 5:2 30:12 156:20 160:16,18 appears 22:18 213:13,15 223:7
added 23:3 122:11 AHA 117:9 160:22,23 161:2 171:7 areas 27:17,17
addendum 171:15 ahead 11:4 109:9 210:12 212:6,19 Appendix 40:6 105:9
adding 34:22 71:6 139:17 212:20,23 applicable 20:12 argue 140:4 166:1
ain't 31:20 86:23 analyze 105:14 applied 221:9 194:4

Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285


GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 244

argument 82:9,13 assist 51:2 attorney/client backfilled 101:19 170:16 197:1


231:1 assistance 26:5 14:6 103:22 104:25 198:6 214:13
argumentative 29:12 199:13,24 August 26:3 106:8 179:19 218:11 219:2,6
106:1 205:19 authority 168:5 backfilling 128:20 Bayou 154:6
arithmetic 229:20 assistant 25:17,20 authorization 128:21 BEARDEN 3:13
Army 1:12,13 3:1 assists 202:16 185:21 background 35:23 beat 216:2,16
33:3 88:7 90:18 association 32:19 authorized 186:3 114:23 behalf 8:19
140:23 141:1 assume 16:21 availability 97:22 backhoe 216:16 belief 186:18
ascertain 17:3 89:12 91:24 94:9 Avenue 1:15 3:4 backyards 238:6 believable 211:16
124:21 169:2 94:15 103:13 6:20 17:23 20:9,9 Bacuta 230:24 believe 35:25 70:10
182:8 106:16 112:15 209:8 213:8 bad 66:16 114:4 86:3 114:7 119:9
ascertaining 31:10 123:23 124:3,8 avoid 35:24,24 BAEZA 2:15 160:15,18,21
140:24 173:16 172:2,8 197:25 award 113:3 153:19,25 154:5 186:15 203:20
asked 16:8 46:16 199:21,25 224:5 aware 8:6 107:16 154:15 209:1 229:3
49:14 51:13 72:3 assumed 18:9 107:20,24 181:11 bank 16:1 19:3 232:19 237:21
89:13 92:16 93:10 94:6,11 183:2,2,6 26:16 32:4 43:11 believes 76:21
126:14 131:24 113:18,19 136:10 66:18,22 67:7 benchmark 183:3
132:10 135:22 136:12 B 103:10 105:8 beneath 72:19,22
148:5 160:12 assumes 236:19 b 4:6 72:23 221:25 107:11 112:2 72:24 113:6
165:23 189:10 assuming 123:14 back 28:11 45:17 197:24 199:10 Benjamin 2:17
190:12 208:17,23 159:20 197:22 49:15 55:10 56:2 221:16 223:11,13 bentonite 142:18
210:6 212:7 202:5 62:1 63:22 65:1 barges 34:6 best 23:7 242:11
227:16 assumption 103:15 74:20 81:5 82:11 Baronne 2:7 Betsy 183:9,20,24
asking 19:9,17 232:21 87:6 93:25 114:13 barring 142:11 184:6
60:10,10 65:8 assumptions 97:4 115:2,6,22 125:5 base 97:3 101:7 better 30:1 134:11
71:13 75:25 81:19 101:8 125:9 129:17 175:16 202:16 202:13
84:6 90:1 98:21 as-built 16:6,16,20 130:18 131:5 based 39:2,6,7 beyond 212:8
152:20 183:13,23 113:12 141:22 163:24 40:24 41:2 56:2 big 70:1 84:2
189:5 198:2 Atchafalaya 185:13 186:8 79:25 86:5,7 177:19 204:19
199:24,25 200:11 192:17 194:13,15 191:21 198:14 100:13 132:1 205:5 231:1
204:22 207:2,9,10 attach 151:7 202:2 206:17 173:23 178:21 Bill 12:19 13:7
207:17,22,23,23 154:14 208:1 214:19 basic 176:24 115:17 219:9
207:24 208:16 attached 11:11,17 215:1 216:1 235:24 224:21
209:16 210:1 11:22 47:21 48:8 219:25 220:3,5 basically 62:3 billions 112:12
224:10 227:21 94:4 109:7 110:19 224:15 225:11 95:15 118:1 biography 11:14
229:5,22 231:3,10 115:12,14 133:6 226:15 235:22 basics 185:24 24:7
asks 18:6 148:23 151:12 236:9 238:3 basin 192:17 bit 57:3 154:7
aspect 29:17 50:4 169:24 197:13 backfill 103:8,9 194:14,15 215:5,6 216:16
110:7 198:9 206:22 104:24 127:19,21 basis 80:6 229:8 black 94:5 174:13
aspects 36:18,19 218:21 233:14 128:3,8,11,19 Bates 9:19,21 14:2 203:10
52:21 165:13 234:17 143:3 174:24 14:15,17,24 15:6 bless 24:20
assess 53:24 80:16 attaches 218:16 177:14,17 178:24 15:8 30:20 31:1 block 117:15,15
209:12 attack 86:25 179:13 214:21 109:9 113:2 118:8 152:7
assessing 53:23 attacked 87:3 216:19 219:4 115:16 131:10 195:15,21
184:1 attention 194:9 222:17,22 226:6 132:17 134:18,21 blocking 230:9
assigned 181:6 198:11,19 226:13 154:10 162:3 blowout 195:24

Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285


GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 245

blue 121:18 122:12 195:3 68:4,9,13,19 218:6 219:8,20 calling 37:14


board 227:24 228:1 breaches 1:4 15:25 69:16,20,22 71:3 220:9,13,18 calls 37:8 224:19
boil 185:24 breaching 185:1 71:9 72:10 76:3 224:20,25 227:3 canal 1:4 32:24
boils 72:23 break 7:21 17:19 76:19 77:2,16,19 227:18,20 229:14 34:5 40:3 187:2
Boland 112:19 84:23 118:15 78:7,10,18,22 229:18,21 230:16 187:13 195:5,11
113:7,14 124:22 139:15 151:2 79:9,21 81:1,4,14 231:13,19 233:8 195:14 197:24
160:13 163:25 183:24 184:6 82:10,12,19,24 233:17 234:4,8,11 205:13 221:15
225:17 226:9,25 84:15,20 85:4,12 234:20 240:8 223:4 228:21
borings 152:9,12 breaks 7:20 183:7 85:23 86:4,10,15 BUCHLER 2:6 230:6,22 231:6,25
152:14 161:6 183:10,20 87:2,10,16,20,25 bucket 177:15,24 232:2,4,11,15,16
178:10 bridge 16:4 17:21 88:6,24 93:24 177:25 232:24,25 233:1,3
borrow 127:22,23 17:22,23 103:2 106:4 build 172:22 186:3 234:19 235:9,18
127:23 128:1 Brief 53:19 93:23 107:18 108:21,25 building 70:17 236:15 237:3,19
198:3 200:4,8 146:21 156:24 109:11,13 110:14 113:7,8 237:25 238:2
203:14 204:23 218:5 227:2 110:21 111:21 built 9:12 16:11,12 canals 176:12
206:24 207:10,12 bring 105:13,17,20 112:9,16 115:15 23:5 37:9 62:2 cantilevered 98:24
210:15 212:12 105:22 128:3 116:4,7 122:1,5,9 106:20 179:18 care 85:5 107:21
213:13,15 219:3 brings 182:14 126:2 130:5,14,24 185:21 108:3
boss 7:19 broader 193:12 131:12 132:2,19 bunch 91:4 135:23 carefully 159:22
bottom 17:6 21:6 broken 26:13 132:23 133:16,24 217:6 carried 25:8
29:8 104:13 brought 79:1 189:6 134:2,19,24 business 47:5 53:5 carry 55:3,8
136:14 144:2,24 222:23 135:15 136:8,25 79:1 114:19 146:3 case 39:2 40:6,8,16
158:2 159:17,24 Brown 33:5 137:5,11,15,25 169:1,11 226:4 41:6 74:22 80:6
172:25 179:20 Bruno 2:3,3,4 4:5 138:7,13,19 139:8 butt 143:19 96:1 123:15
188:20 206:6 6:1,15,24 7:1 9:17 139:21 140:5,10 buys 230:24 168:12 209:21
232:25 9:22 10:3,6,18,25 140:14 146:22 buy-in 230:23 214:19 231:12,16
boundaries 83:20 11:5,12,18 12:4,9 149:5,8 151:3,15 bypass 107:17,22 231:21
169:9 12:13,18 13:2,6 151:22 152:5 case-by-case 80:5
boundary 91:13 13:13,18 14:8,13 153:5,13,23 154:2 C categories 43:21
Box 2:16 14:21 15:3,11,13 154:8,20 155:6,24 c 72:23 44:1 227:16
braced 116:13 18:14,23 19:8,14 156:5,10,25 cake 114:8,16 cause 66:17,18,22
172:16,17,22 19:22,24 24:1 161:21,25 162:4,8 135:21 137:17 67:6,7,10 69:5
222:6,7 27:8,13 30:9 31:4 162:14 166:2 140:15 102:11 187:10
bracing 209:14 31:7,19,24 32:9 170:18,23 171:3,5 calculate 204:19 209:23 223:5
branch 2:13 14:1 34:19,25 35:8 174:3 183:15,21 calculations 124:1 242:16
24:22 25:14,16 36:15 37:2 42:25 189:7,16 190:13 call 47:7,7 63:8 caused 34:4,4 69:9
26:1,2,10 28:9,13 43:4 44:2,6,14,20 190:19 191:7,14 124:17 164:21 83:23 91:14
110:9 125:24 44:24 45:8,15,19 191:23 192:21 181:3 223:20 101:23 112:12
126:1,14,21 46:18,24 47:1,24 193:3,9,17,22 called 33:10,17 186:7
198:21 199:3,7 48:4,12 52:2 194:6,10 195:9,18 34:1 48:8 49:23 causing 67:10
213:20 221:8 53:17,20 57:17,20 196:5,12 197:6,15 119:14 142:18 133:8
breach 16:2,2 58:15,21 63:1,6 198:13 202:1 164:16,17 165:4 CCR 1:24 5:22
19:25 105:10 63:11,17,23 64:2 203:22,25 205:1,4 165:11 169:13 242:2,24
132:25 133:10 64:12,17,23 65:3 206:20 211:7,14 189:4 190:8,11 cease 80:3
134:4 186:6,11 65:13,19,23,25 211:20 212:1,4 200:19 215:1,11 CEMVN 198:19,19
190:24 194:19 66:4,7 67:16,20 214:4 217:22 216:11,23 230:15 center 121:8

Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285


GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 246

156:16 169:11 92:17 149:23 clearly 86:13 commonly 16:5 113:20 136:10,14
204:7 checklist 56:11,13 close 47:8 142:10 communicated 144:24,25 174:23
centers 143:18 56:21 57:7 58:4,7 142:15 177:1,5 181:7 226:13
certain 28:6 49:19 58:24 59:3,5 205:11 209:23 community 169:13 conditions 56:3,4
52:8 55:3 56:3 chief 24:7 25:16,17 217:10 236:4 169:16 74:16 91:13 97:19
62:1 69:1 100:3 25:20,24 26:6,11 closed 141:11 compact 177:19 178:13
123:2 136:3 49:16 119:21,22 143:6 176:16 215:7 conducive 178:18
189:10 239:2 125:6,7 126:13,16 closely 111:17 compacted 129:3 conduct 104:14,16
certainly 14:12 126:17,25 127:2,5 closer 16:3 203:17 214:21 216:19 conducted 126:10
16:22 79:24 127:8 198:11,17 203:18 206:18 222:18 conducts 240:11
108:10 198:18 199:1,7 222:14 223:11,13 compacting 178:6 confess 211:13
certificate 161:13 208:21,22 210:10 closes 143:20 214:23 configuration 55:1
241:1 242:1 212:7,10 175:10,18 176:6,8 compaction 128:22 94:6
Certified 1:25 5:23 chief's 127:3 closing 142:15 128:25 129:2 confined 236:24
242:3,25 CHO 158:2 clue 139:2 231:2 177:15,21,24 237:16
certify 241:4 242:4 CHRISTOPHER code 170:1 215:13 216:5 confused 76:5
242:13 3:14,20 coding 163:20 compacts 216:2 165:19
cetera 18:8 109:18 circles 81:13 coffee 7:20 Compare 215:24 connect 114:23
109:18 173:6,7 circumstance cofferdam 116:13 completed 177:14 connected 97:13
chain-link 202:15 145:13 159:24 174:22 221:17 connection 107:10
Chalmette 154:17 circumstances 72:2 222:5,8 completely 102:13 109:17,25 118:23
chance 159:22 166:3 cofferdams 222:6 completeness 37:12 consequent 97:4
change 23:20 70:13 city 48:16 51:17 Colletti 42:12,13 compliance 161:13 101:8
91:12 138:24 52:7 56:8,17 57:7 49:8,10 205:23 221:22 consider 34:11
197:3 57:16 58:8 80:22 color 22:4 component 108:7 36:7 212:25
changed 23:18 81:2 112:12 come 24:24 28:11 206:9 231:11
228:16 civil 1:4 2:13 5:6 29:20 46:11 63:21 components 26:23 consideration 73:9
changes 74:16 25:16 26:1,2 80:5 87:6 102:10 composite 161:19 97:1,25 98:2
241:6 Claiborne 16:4 115:2 120:6 compromise 54:11 165:15 166:17,20
changing 71:7 18:1 20:9 122:25 129:15 computer 39:12 166:22,24 167:14
230:5 clarify 37:25 202:2 170:8 175:10,20 40:1,5,7 242:9 167:15,21
channel 26:15 clarity 52:4 219:25 224:14 concept 99:7 considerations
34:12 107:17,23 Class 141:9 143:18 225:11 236:9 172:16 38:18 96:22 165:5
158:17 classical 100:15 comes 115:6,22 concern 66:8,11,15 165:12 167:8
characterization classically 215:1 168:11 227:24 66:15 67:25 96:18 168:17 189:19
133:9 classification 235:18 concerned 151:25 190:15 193:11,13
characterize 108:5 157:19 comfortable 80:16 206:7 207:25 219:12,24 220:3
charge 27:21 28:21 clay 128:12 129:7 139:19 concerns 28:9 224:16
charged 187:1 157:11,11,18 coming 20:21 189:19 190:15 considered 165:14
CHARLES 3:11 158:3,4,13,22,24 112:24 129:21 conclude 16:19 166:17
check 38:16 55:6 158:24 195:17,17 177:9 196:18 23:4 125:16 146:9 consistent 56:4
95:6,8 96:14 clays 157:21 217:6 224:10 200:18 144:20 170:9
125:23 171:8 cleanup 26:20 commence 171:17 conclusion 176:22 208:19 232:8
172:20 clear 19:16 32:3 comment 53:21 202:12 consists 178:17
checked 91:14 56:1 122:21 commentary 69:19 concrete 98:23,24 CONSOLIDATED
checking 54:13 150:10 112:7 112:18 113:5,17 1:5

Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285


GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 247

constructed 16:19 continuous 230:10 200:20,21,24 226:19,24 213:25 218:9


48:10,21 49:6 contract 28:2,8,22 201:1 205:12 correct 16:14,25 242:14,14
56:23 178:25 33:1,14 83:23 206:23 207:3 17:12 21:2,8,11 count 12:23
construction 28:7 89:12,14,17 90:7 209:11 225:2,4,9 22:17,21 24:11,23 couple 62:7 76:9
28:11,17,21 29:13 111:7 120:1 125:4 copies 12:22 13:9,9 28:23 37:19 42:1 125:12 137:10
29:18 32:1 48:7 125:14,16,22 13:15 49:8 45:25 46:1,5 course 23:16 36:17
50:14 56:21 62:14 146:11 150:6 copy 10:22 12:20 50:18,21,24 51:6 176:22 231:16,20
62:16 66:9 69:3 167:11 219:13,16 154:11 54:1,16 57:5 233:12
72:17 79:2 83:23 220:24,25 221:7 corner 153:3 61:24 62:6,6,10 Court 1:1,25 5:23
89:1,12,14,16 223:25 Corps 1:12,14 3:1 62:18 69:7,15,17 242:3,25
97:23 119:23 contracting 162:22 3:2 16:11 23:19 70:20 73:7,11 courtesy 233:10
123:10 125:7 164:3,4 167:24 27:24 28:18,19 74:10 75:5 76:10 courtroom 45:2
127:2,5 129:22 221:23 29:9,12 31:17 79:20 88:12,18,21 85:16
130:3 148:14 contractor 28:5 33:3 34:11 36:3,7 89:5,7,10 92:8,24 cover 18:21 150:5
151:6 163:11 90:14 92:22 93:3 37:8 41:21 46:3 93:5,7 101:4 163:5 166:3
167:18 168:1 109:14 111:3,14 49:21 50:6,7,9 118:17,20 120:13 168:18
169:23 184:2 113:4 115:2 129:3 56:23 70:18,25 123:17,20 124:7 covered 199:19,22
192:6,9 198:11 129:7 146:11 71:13 72:5 76:15 128:17 129:6,9 220:2
199:12,15,23 163:3,12 180:22 76:21,25 78:14 147:13 148:4 covering 143:25
208:23 209:12 181:7 209:13 81:7 88:7 89:9,15 150:16,24,25 covers 18:25
212:7,10 219:18 221:17,22 223:2,7 89:23 90:4,8,11 156:23 159:1,13 cows 215:9
220:21 224:8 223:10,13 90:11,15,18,19,24 166:11 167:15 crack 101:14
Consultants 33:6 contractors 125:10 91:2,6,7 98:4 168:8,22 170:11 102:12 104:10,11
contact 223:17,18 contrary 138:21 102:19 103:3 173:14,19 174:19 104:19 186:19
237:22 239:8 104:14 106:7,15 175:2 178:7 188:7 194:21,24
contained 39:16 contribute 143:24 106:15 109:21,25 179:23 182:6 crane 113:17 173:4
contains 218:10,15 contributing 111:13,14 115:22 186:1,5,9,14 crawler 173:3
contaminants 187:22 188:1 115:24 118:22 192:3 197:18 crazy 231:14,15
142:23 196:23 123:7,7 124:15,22 198:4 203:15 create 101:23
contamination contribution 187:6 129:12,17 140:23 205:9 206:5 212:9 168:2 174:22
143:24 control 42:20 48:11 141:1 144:2,5,11 212:13,21 221:1 created 135:25
contemplate 48:22 49:6 50:23 145:13,17,23 222:3,11 227:10 177:3
225:24 51:10 56:22 58:10 146:13 147:1,2,8 228:11 240:4 credited 113:25
content 214:22 59:17 70:12 72:18 150:6 156:17 241:7 242:11 Creep 39:15 40:25
215:3,4 216:20 73:19 88:10 96:25 160:1 163:4,4,17 corrections 241:6 96:8,12,13
217:11 97:5,16,18 118:25 163:18,25 164:2 241:13,15 crest 204:14
context 8:8 103:10 119:14 120:2,4,6 170:4,9 172:3 correctly 197:22 criteria 39:13 43:2
110:23 111:24 121:8 124:19,20 173:9,25 181:6,7 correspondence 70:23
112:23 114:19 144:10 151:6 182:7,22 185:11 125:5 critical 56:22
144:8 146:10 160:3 164:22 186:2,7,15,18 cost 114:1 critique 170:9
148:1 161:2 165:1,14,16 166:7 188:22,24 189:25 costing 112:10 crosshatch 158:12
180:18 193:16,24 166:8,9,16,19 189:25 190:2,11 costs 97:23 112:7 crosshatched
continually 233:21 167:2,13,22 190:20,22 191:6 counsel 3:2 5:3 6:5 157:25 158:1
continue 68:16 168:10,16 172:7 191:20 192:16 7:10,14 8:11 crossing 105:24
117:17 173:17 180:7,12 193:25 194:1,17 11:13 13:22 14:6 232:20
continuing 62:24 180:15 184:4 195:2 198:19 67:13 140:12 cross-correspond...

Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285


GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 248

121:21 241:25 194:20,22 97:11 106:25 designated 27:16


cross-examination dated 23:2 52:17 deflects 101:14 117:16 120:25 29:4 105:5 199:10
211:22 datum 17:13 23:14 defray 113:25 121:7,11 122:22 designation 201:21
cross-examine 23:18,19,24 24:2 degree 78:24 122:23 123:2 designed 54:9 55:1
240:16 223:8 deleterious 180:7 145:11 149:14 55:3 61:25 89:20
cross-purposes day 44:7,17 68:15 184:3 150:13,24 177:7 89:24 90:4,15
49:21 85:14 187:8 demolition 108:7 184:6 197:25 185:3,10,15
cross-section 15:17 190:18 191:10 108:12 113:8 201:2 219:3 191:22
16:8 71:7 93:16 day-to-day 27:21 199:11 225:10,10 DESIGNEE 1:12
105:13,13,21 29:22 denial 169:25 depths 23:10 designers 50:3
197:20 202:3 DDR 33:13 density 215:10,20 149:25 designing 92:10,17
cross-sectional de 90:3 222:18,24 described 22:9 designs 32:6,18
74:13 deal 14:9 35:9 70:1 department 2:12 80:14 140:25 95:3,4 98:25
cross-sections 166:5 224:2 33:2 109:23 146:12 desk 199:6
105:7,19 decide 118:12 167:23,24 168:14 describes 16:12 destruction 79:15
crystal 122:20 decided 118:11 168:20 172:3,12 describing 102:5 detail 91:5
cubic 215:16 decision 117:16 172:14 173:11 description 158:10 detailed 59:4
Cunningham 33:5 decisions 168:6 205:18 179:7,9 determination
cup 7:20 deemed 41:15 dependent 23:14 descriptors 128:6 61:17
curious 37:3,16 deep 36:24 37:23 97:19 143:13 design 9:10 10:7 determine 41:9,24
175:11 73:14 76:14 91:23 depending 72:1 26:13 33:1,17,20 55:15 56:24 59:9
current 197:25 92:22 118:13 79:23 126:18 34:1 36:17 37:5,6 59:16 60:17 61:12
currently 199:11 119:13 120:16 160:5 39:14 40:8,16 70:11,24 73:17
cut 36:9,25 38:7,13 123:8 140:17 depends 73:22 41:8,21 42:7 48:6 94:24 103:4
197:24 203:4,7,8 176:15 182:19 141:5,8,14,16,19 50:4,13,20 51:6 115:25 160:2
222:1 223:10,13 200:22 209:6,17 157:15 164:15 54:14,17,23 55:10 228:4
cutoff 38:11 210:15 213:6,12 depicted 23:4 55:13,17,20,23 determined 39:1
cuts 103:23 deeper 144:21 depo 197:8 56:2,2,6,25 59:8 determining 175:4
cutting 34:3 145:1,6 172:10 deponent 5:10 59:12,14,15,20,22 develop 161:6
cylindrical 143:2,5 221:25 deposit 157:7,10,11 59:23 60:7,9,18 developed 24:15
defect 188:23,25 157:16 61:7,14,18,19,23 117:9
D 190:1,3,23 191:25 deposition 1:10 5:4 62:4 72:17 73:8 development 68:2
D 3:10 4:1,6 192:9 5:14 6:2 7:3,13 74:16 80:9 91:10 194:21
DACW 33:1 defective 139:2 8:8,12 9:3 11:8 92:4,6,12 93:11 device 180:4,5
Dam 48:6 192:4,5,6,7 12:22 13:14 42:16 94:11,12,19 97:1 DF 229:9
damage 69:5 70:12 define 77:21 64:7 86:14,21 97:4,6,17,24 98:1 diagram 95:18
112:13 209:24 168:25 112:1 138:23 99:6 101:8 103:13 149:24
damned 112:1 defines 123:4 148:16 201:24 106:18 119:11 diameter 143:20
140:17 defining 75:10 227:17 240:17 141:23 154:16 177:7
dams 26:14 50:23 77:10 242:8 156:8 165:13 difference 84:2,4
DAN 2:15 definite 8:21 depositions 11:25 167:1 188:23 93:9 193:4 207:7
dangerous 108:24 definitely 49:17 deposits 97:14 189:1 190:2,23 237:7
dare 86:16,17 definition 188:3,9 DEPO-VUE 3:23 191:25 192:2,5 differences 220:15
data 40:5 161:12 definitive 116:18 depth 17:3,20 19:3 197:22 200:1,3 different 30:4
163:4 182:25 deflecting 195:12 19:18 33:18 34:5 201:16 36:23 71:14 131:8
date 10:20 241:8,11 deflection 186:21 36:12 37:21 91:4 designate 227:22 158:9,11 164:8

Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285


GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 249

183:4 197:24 district 1:1,2,14 190:17 198:25 116:14,25 140:17 easy 125:2 146:2
207:21 24:9 33:3 42:3 199:20,20,23 161:11 163:2,3 230:1
dig 34:12 43:10 48:16 49:4 51:3 200:2 202:14 drawn 120:15 EBIA 105:10
46:11 74:18 52:10 53:22 68:20 203:11 211:19 dredged 107:22 edge 222:15
171:20 201:17,18 73:9 75:18 168:6 214:19 217:15 dredging 34:4 36:4 effect 34:10 36:20
digging 42:5,19 169:8,9 208:7 218:7,11,12,12,13 36:11 107:12 180:7 184:3,23
55:25 70:16 89:3 227:7 218:13 220:7,16 108:4 195:15,15
117:20 118:16 districts 52:11 228:13 240:7 dress 223:7 eight 113:5 150:22
159:23 208:5 disturb 45:24 documentation drier 215:6 eighth 117:15
digs 76:13 disturbance 192:23 125:25 147:16,18 drive 171:24 180:4 118:8
Dilution 229:11 division 2:13 14:1 167:22 driving 36:24 eighths 176:2
directed 225:19 24:22 25:18,21 documented 59:21 66:12 67:5 69:3 either 36:24 71:21
direction 89:2 26:8 28:7 30:6 59:24 104:5 134:6 171:18 180:5 80:14 84:1 104:21
149:17 232:7,10 49:17 110:7,12 167:6,16 drop 102:6 235:21 127:22 128:22
235:10 238:10 119:22,23 125:6,7 documenting 58:20 236:16 155:4 184:5
239:4,6 126:19 127:1,9,11 documents 9:2,4 drops 236:18 195:16
directly 186:23 148:14 163:12 12:2,3,8 48:20 due 78:19 113:12 elevation 17:6,8,10
disagree 44:12,17 167:18 168:1 92:6 109:18 111:4 dug 81:23 83:25 17:14 20:2 33:24
46:19 169:10,15,23 123:25 130:17,21 106:7 134:4 38:2,19 39:1,2,6,7
disapproval 163:9 198:11,18,19,21 131:16 134:9 duly 6:22 242:6 41:2,3 102:15
disapprove 162:21 199:2,16,16 135:6 143:11 Dupre 154:6 117:11 153:12
disapproved 170:1 208:22,23 209:12 148:2 151:16 DUVAL 1:6 159:18,25 185:16
170:17 210:10 219:14,18 216:1 D.C 2:18 185:19,25 186:4
disapproves 163:19 220:22 224:8 Doe 43:10,16,16 187:2 202:9 223:6
disclosures 154:18 225:12,20 45:20 54:19 E 236:5,7 237:5
discovered 113:4 DM 9:5,9 doing 47:6 61:20 E 3:13 4:1,1,6,6 elevations 9:6
178:12 226:1 document 10:12 62:14 68:22 70:22 170:1 222:21 22:20 149:17
discretion 77:7 12:20 13:20 15:15 80:7,8 86:8 ear 226:18 eleven 102:15
discretionary 15:16 16:18,23 116:12 129:23 earlier 95:3 219:12 eliminated 77:3
76:20 77:12 79:4 17:2 20:15 24:3 180:10 212:6,6 early 25:22 119:25 102:5
79:12 88:15,19 30:7,13 31:3,10 227:25,25 228:2 195:25 EM 52:15
173:21,25 31:12,13 32:1,23 dollars 112:12 earth 37:23 54:20 embankment 93:20
discussion 171:16 33:9,12 37:4 dots 114:23 176:25 95:25 101:15
186:12 47:15,19,23 48:15 dozer 215:8 easier 10:4 186:20 202:5
displacement 175:9 48:19 50:3 51:17 dozers 215:19 east 16:1 19:3 217:7
194:24,25 221:15 52:1 56:7,8,20 drafted 50:5,7 26:16 32:4 40:2 employee 28:18,19
disposal 110:24 57:25 58:13 100:9 drain 223:3,4 43:11 103:10 113:14
113:22 107:4 108:17,20 draw 93:21 120:12 105:7 107:11 EMs 49:23
disposed 113:22 109:2 115:24 123:16 176:22 112:2 149:13 enclosure 114:1
distance 69:1 121:3 117:2 124:6,9,21 234:6 150:12 152:19 213:19,21
122:21,24,25 129:12 134:11,12 drawing 16:6,20 155:4,20 156:12 enclosures 213:16
201:2,2 202:25 134:21 135:2 17:18 20:21 21:1 156:14 199:10 214:3,7,8
204:9 136:2 148:19 21:4,5,7,9 94:1 207:9 encounter 7:9
distinct 26:13 150:1 151:5,5 121:25 130:8 easterly 149:17 encounters 168:10
distinction 51:15 156:17 161:10,20 drawings 16:16 eastern 1:2 206:24 ends 96:25
51:21 173:12,13,22 113:13 115:9 213:14 energy 215:18

Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285


GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 250

engage 50:8 ensure 97:6 103:6 104:23 65:25 66:7 67:20 159:17 164:6
engineer 25:3 entails 97:6 166:10 68:19 69:16,22 168:12 169:3
128:5 175:12 entering 188:11,19 evaluates 109:23 71:9 72:10 76:3 172:17,18,22
176:20 216:17 entire 17:20 38:5 115:24 76:19 77:2,19 173:1 188:20
engineering 14:1 152:17 185:2 evaluating 53:5 78:22 79:9,21 209:6,15 210:2,3
24:22 25:4,6,18 204:14 208:18 58:9 60:5,15 81:4,14 82:10,24 213:6 221:6,15
25:20 26:8 28:12 entirely 40:14 95:13 114:19 88:6,24 93:24 222:15
29:19 30:6 33:8 entirety 113:21 169:1 199:13 103:2 106:4 excavations 26:19
49:16,24,25 50:1 entitled 32:23 203:13,16,21,23 107:18 108:25 47:6 51:9 53:5,23
50:2,2,13,16,19 72:16 84:17 96:21 204:2,13,14 109:13 110:14,21 67:9 127:18
50:25 51:3,16,22 134:13 205:20 112:16 116:7 178:11 221:19,25
52:5 54:4 72:16 environment evaluation 46:3 122:9 126:2 132:2 222:18
78:2 96:20 109:15 158:15,16,20,23 54:10 55:25 57:8 132:23 134:2 Excellent 209:3
110:6,12 119:22 equal 237:24 70:25 71:13,25 135:15 136:8 excess 97:4,15
124:4,5 125:6 equals 237:19 72:5 75:3,18 76:7 140:14 146:22 101:8,16 104:10
126:19 127:1,9,11 equipment 161:12 80:20 88:10 90:19 149:8 151:3,15 186:21 187:4,15
148:11 164:24 equipped 173:4 103:20 104:1,3,4 152:5 153:13 195:13 196:8
165:3,5,12,15 ERDIC 169:17 117:4,24 118:23 155:6,24 156:10 239:16
166:17,20,21,24 ERIC 3:18 120:12 123:25 156:25 162:14 excessive 72:21
167:8,14,15,21,23 erodibility 217:5 124:15 126:9 166:2 171:5 174:3 141:11
168:14,17,20,24 erosion 226:10 127:7 144:7 183:21 190:19 exclude 187:6,22
169:6 172:3,11,14 ESQ 3:9,10,11,12 145:14 146:15 191:23 194:10 excludes 187:23
173:11 175:3 3:13,14,15,18,19 147:16 148:12 195:18 196:12 execution 24:8
180:17 198:17,18 3:20 164:24 175:4 197:15 198:13 exercise 219:10
198:21 199:1,16 ESQUIRE 2:4,5,6 178:22 180:17 202:1 203:25 exhibit 4:8,9,10,11
205:18,19,24 2:14,15 3:3 182:22 203:7 205:4 206:20 4:12,13,14,15,16
208:8,10,22,23 essentially 123:6 208:8,11 228:3 212:4 214:4 4:17,18,19,20,21
209:1 210:1,2,10 149:16 evaluations 124:22 217:22 218:6 4:22,23,24 11:10
210:20 219:12,14 establish 82:25 eventually 66:19 219:20 220:18 11:16,21 20:16
219:24 220:2,5 180:21 225:14 232:14 224:25 227:3,20 47:20 56:9 94:2,3
223:19,24 224:16 established 49:14 everybody 216:24 229:21 230:16 100:9 109:4,6
225:12,20 82:2,4 88:16 evidence 5:15 233:17 234:8,20 110:16,18 111:1
engineeringly 205:15 208:4 exact 94:13 95:2 240:12 115:7,11,13 116:3
77:23 establishing 183:16 98:3 examine 210:2 121:24 122:11
engineers 1:12,14 et 18:8 109:18,18 exactly 80:10 95:22 examined 6:23 124:16 130:6,9
3:1,2 33:4,5,15 173:6,6 116:12 183:19 210:3 131:7,15 132:17
50:6,8,9 56:23 evaluate 51:9 53:8 192:15 194:18 example 27:25 133:1,4,5 134:8
70:18 88:8 89:24 56:18 60:9,11,16 210:21 225:13 73:14 136:7 148:20,22
90:4,8,11,11,18 61:2 69:24 70:10 examination 4:3 excavated 93:13 151:8,11 153:22
102:19 104:14 73:17 76:15 118:4 6:24 10:6,18 94:10 173:1 159:16 161:3
109:21 140:23 136:21 147:2 13:18 15:13 19:24 excavating 144:8 162:13,15 178:22
141:1 156:17 168:15 199:17 24:1 27:13 31:7 excavation 53:8,9 179:22 197:1,12
160:2 175:13 206:3 207:9,11 32:9 35:8 37:2 55:7,13,16 56:4 198:5,8 204:25
178:10 186:2 208:17 209:4 43:4 45:19 47:1 56:14 90:6 91:14 218:8,20 219:1,2
191:21 198:20 212:11 47:24 48:12 52:2 110:24 117:8,16 220:8 234:13,16
enormous 79:15 evaluated 90:16 53:20 57:20 58:21 117:18 145:6 Exhibits 154:23

Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285


GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 251

exist 29:11 195:1 5:22 242:2,24 204:13 207:14 194:7 208:15


existed 49:17 73:20 fairly 105:3 208:3,6 209:6,6,8 209:3 211:2 213:4
existing 17:7 37:9 F fairness 82:20 209:17,18,22 213:22 234:12
37:11 54:4 111:6 face 42:18 187:13 121:6 213:7,12 221:25 finger 150:9
113:6 222:19,24 facilities 113:23 fall 197:23 206:8 222:13,14 223:7,9 finish 22:23 82:22
223:12,15 fact 18:2 36:21 206:16 223:11,14 237:9 83:19 176:18
exists 13:5 73:3 38:17 55:14 56:5 false 230:3 fellows 46:10 211:21 221:17
92:3 64:3 74:25 100:21 familiar 16:15 felt 102:16 223:2
expect 111:25 102:5 103:17 26:16 30:7 32:17 fence 202:15 finished 87:22
160:9 172:11 106:6 126:22 73:5 97:24 98:1,2 222:21 226:5,6 115:17
179:21 199:15 131:15 147:19 169:22 182:1 Fermin 171:17 finishing 233:10
expectation 147:11 150:21 173:9 184:8 field 16:13 165:6,9 first 6:22 7:2 8:5,16
147:14 185:12 196:8 199:24 familiarity 129:11 166:25 167:3,9 26:21 30:10 47:17
expected 178:21 212:7 228:15 far 28:8 29:16 fifteen 209:7,7,18 50:1 51:25 58:1
179:5 230:4,21 232:10 38:24 49:14 66:12 fifty 142:8 73:15 76:25 86:20
expects 111:13 233:18 239:10,17 88:17 95:24 96:7 fight 190:17 191:9 110:22 117:7
experience 127:7 factor 39:16 40:25 114:15 176:15 figure 14:16 15:7 134:11 136:17
experienced 192:16 56:6 91:16 94:20 185:10 207:13 27:20 76:7,11 141:19 150:1
195:5 96:15 120:20,22 fat 128:12 131:14 139:14 161:3 181:12
expert 40:20 98:20 187:22,24 196:23 fault 181:13,14,17 198:23 184:14,16 185:6
98:22 189:5,6,23 229:11 182:4,9 214:18 figures 120:20 200:17 202:3
expertise 50:9 facts 166:25 167:2 faulting 181:21,22 figuring 202:17 203:11 206:2
169:12 231:10 182:16 file 16:11 124:3 209:20 220:19
explain 9:8 73:13 fail 206:17 Federal 5:6 6:4 125:4,14,16 223:17 242:5
93:14 226:3 238:8 failure 15:23 38:8 federally 48:10,21 files 16:10 125:22 Fisher 3:9 240:13
explaining 238:18 38:13 66:19,20,22 49:6 127:4 240:14
238:20 104:5,8 185:14 feel 73:16 fill 74:20 137:23 fit 43:20 44:12
explains 177:1 186:8,13,17,19 feet 22:15 33:19 142:18 158:17,17 five 222:13
explanation 183:5 187:5 188:23,25 34:5,6,13 36:4 177:18 215:2,2 five-minute 139:15
187:21 189:17,21 190:16 37:18 41:14 42:19 216:24 217:4 flat 150:14
explanations 183:3 191:20 192:15,15 43:11 45:21 54:20 final 131:18,21 flavor 115:19
exploratory 178:11 192:24 195:3,4,11 58:1 68:22 71:11 132:7,9 float 32:7,19
expose 173:1 195:13,23,25 71:24 73:14,15 finaled 221:20 floating 217:16
extends 73:1 196:22,24 74:19,21 83:10,11 finally 96:6 135:13 flood 19:4 32:25
Extension 223:16 failures 15:18 67:7 83:13,15 113:20 find 49:22 60:22 33:13 36:10 42:6
extent 100:3 184:18 117:16,20 118:18 117:2,25 124:9 42:9,20 47:8
179:15 fair 7:16 23:1 33:11 119:13 121:7 136:4 189:22,24 48:10,22 49:6
extract 180:6 35:17 57:24 58:11 136:13,13,15,19 fine 9:1 14:14 51:9 56:22 58:10
extracted 173:2,5 60:21 61:15 62:5 140:20 142:3,24 33:25,25 35:12 59:17 70:12 71:8
extractor 173:5 74:8 75:2 91:1 143:22 144:16,18 43:1 45:16 46:25 72:12,14 73:19,23
extreme 202:21 93:8 114:18,18 144:19,22,25 49:2 51:12 53:13 83:3,10,12,16
extremely 72:12 125:11 169:20 145:6,11 149:15 53:18 55:18 67:4 88:9 90:25 92:18
180:24 183:22 192:1 149:18 150:14,22 78:8 83:9 96:16 94:7 116:1 118:25
E-mail 218:14,15 203:23 206:21 157:8 160:7 99:10 106:5,10,11 119:17 121:8,14
224:17 238:10 228:12 168:12,13 172:10 126:6 133:25 140:21 141:3
E-99 194:15,22 FAIRBANKS 1:24 200:22 204:6,6,7 154:21 191:15 144:10 145:25

Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285


GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 252

151:6 160:3 233:22 235:10 former 113:11,13 203:2 242:13 229:17


168:16 172:7 236:17 239:3,5,11 113:16 Furthermore gist 114:6
173:17 180:7,12 flows 231:23 232:3 forms 101:14 159:3 178:16 give 9:18 16:8 17:6
180:14 181:18 232:15,17 236:18 formula 94:25 future 35:24 20:16 27:5 35:23
182:10 183:7 238:3 forth 125:5,9 242:7 48:20 49:1 63:4
184:4 188:7 focused 193:7 forward 19:21 G 73:13 84:13,16
199:18 205:11 folder 124:3 147:4 Gagliano 181:25 85:2 92:7 100:14
207:13 208:6 folks 24:24 66:9 forwarded 119:21 182:1,11 112:22 115:16
228:7 68:21 212:16 game 7:6 44:9 134:17 137:19
flooded 112:11 follow 40:22 42:5,7 found 97:9 114:14 games 68:15 138:17 168:20
Flooding 81:2 52:22 174:16 176:14 140:12 216:17 231:22
floods 80:21 following 149:12 foundation 42:23 Gannuch 33:5 given 1:13 7:2
floodwall 9:14 188:14 205:20 67:11 71:2 76:18 Gately 217:19,25 62:13 166:25
17:20 37:9,10,11 follows 6:23 72:18 76:24 78:5,6,12 218:15 223:15 167:4 226:12
46:10 52:15 53:8 73:10 78:17 97:21 gather 179:3 241:5,7
53:10 59:23 61:3 foot 99:13 177:15 102:14 113:16 gathering 71:22 gives 17:7 20:18
69:25 76:16 90:13 203:1,3 215:16 183:17 184:18 general 96:22 152:15 216:4
91:10 93:4,18,19 237:8 186:13,17 188:22 136:19 154:16,18 223:8
93:19 97:1 99:12 force 101:24 188:24 198:21 183:2 giving 225:9
100:7 105:11 237:12 foundations 72:19 generally 7:5 99:20 GIWW 153:3
106:20 118:18 forces 97:3 101:7 110:25 113:6,15 184:17 global 95:8,10,11
136:20 141:23 foregoing 241:4 113:17 136:10 gentleman 31:16 95:24 119:4
146:17 147:4 forget 17:21 199:3 geologic 105:7,12 123:14 147:25
149:13 150:12 forgive 23:19 91:21 founded 113:19 105:18,19,20,24 156:20 160:21
160:6 175:6 92:5 143:9 181:2 136:11 151:18 212:19 213:2
202:15,18,25 forgot 135:16,24 four 25:16 26:4 geometry 74:13 go 11:4 14:18,25
207:19 209:8,18 form 5:12 35:2,7 184:18 203:21,24 geotech 26:12 15:4 17:5 18:5
209:23 213:8 35:11 45:12,14 204:2 214:8 28:13 110:13 19:21 21:12 24:24
223:15 227:8,12 69:14 71:2 72:7 fourth 83:15 199:7 213:20 28:9,13 29:10
227:23 228:1,21 75:23 77:15 79:19 Franklin 2:17 217:18,18 220:23 30:5 34:7 45:17
230:6 232:23 102:3 115:6 frankly 78:25 221:8 223:22,22 55:10 56:2,17
233:19 239:23 116:10 119:18 175:12 182:17 223:23,24 60:17 61:8 62:25
floodwalls 50:17 136:24 137:1 freely 223:4 geotechnical 24:21 68:24 80:2,8
53:6,23 96:21 138:1,3,23 139:2 front 57:19 25:3,4,14 26:10 82:11 91:19 92:4
97:8 98:11,15 139:4 161:17,17 full 102:14 104:12 28:8,10,12 29:10 92:16 93:6 94:12
106:25 162:17,20 163:5,8 186:22 187:15 36:18 48:6 110:8 100:3 102:6 109:9
FLORIAN 2:6 163:13,17,17,20 188:18 196:10 110:9 119:20 114:13 115:1
Florida 17:22,23 163:22 164:1 fully 187:1 125:24,25 126:14 118:11 119:13
17:24 20:9 170:20 233:25 function 143:14 126:21 127:13,14 133:22 136:13
flow 67:7 149:16 formal 30:5 126:23 177:7 201:1 205:24 139:17,22,23
150:20,23 228:15 formalities 5:8 231:23 236:3 germane 64:6 141:22 145:6
228:18,20 230:5,7 formation 143:6 fund 182:19 getting 52:23 76:4 147:4 149:20
230:10,10,18,22 186:23 furnish 109:15 76:13 83:20 152:8 159:14,22
231:5,23 232:2,7 formed 39:12 further 18:5 71:24 111:23 140:11 169:15 187:19
238:9,20,23 104:11 186:19 141:25 147:14 188:18 192:20 194:16 197:4
flowing 232:9 188:7 178:6 182:25 217:8 219:13 199:2 212:14

Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285


GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 253

215:17 235:22 238:5,7,9 group 26:18 107:25 H heck 35:4 111:25


236:8 238:24 GOLDBERG 3:18 129:19 150:7 H 4:6 height 72:2 74:23
goal 85:2 good 6:25 23:13 162:22,23 164:5 half 8:16 158:3 91:5 233:20
God 24:20 53:15 65:24 70:5 164:24 165:8 halfway 146:19 236:20
goes 21:23 66:13 88:1 91:1 124:4 217:17 229:7 hammer 176:7 help 15:10 30:6
79:16 80:2 103:22 155:1 157:7 grout 226:14 hand 7:22 52:1 43:5 70:8 112:17
120:19 125:9 213:24 231:20 growth 181:13,17 202:22 219:19 152:22,23 155:1
130:18 150:21 goodness 231:21 182:4,9 222:24 156:1 167:10
154:1,7 163:20 gotten 148:5 guaranteeing 228:6 handled 164:7 169:14 182:19
184:25 199:5,7 governing 41:5 guess 8:9,16 21:4 hands 168:9 helps 218:19
200:4 202:3,20 government 6:7 25:22 27:15 37:15 happen 22:11 hereinabove 242:7
205:7,13 232:16 7:10 8:6,11,20 67:15 70:3 72:8 44:19,21 62:19 hereto 5:3 11:11,17
236:8 238:2 13:22 197:2 75:24 102:18 83:24 125:17 11:22 47:21 94:4
going 8:7 11:19 214:16 218:10 103:3 107:15 happened 8:22 109:7 110:19
12:3,16 18:21 graces 213:25 125:3 130:19 62:22 103:5 115:12,14 133:6
20:23 27:2,3 grade 222:24 151:23 184:25 194:17,18,23 148:23 151:12
29:16,22,25 37:11 grand 176:1 185:8 207:6,8 happening 8:23 197:13 198:9
41:22 44:8,16,21 gravel 107:5,5 217:3 227:21 happens 28:1 98:18 218:21 234:17
45:23 46:11 49:15 159:5 guidance 48:7,9,20 120:19 148:4 242:15
58:2 63:4,16,18 gravity 98:23 49:5 53:1,3 221:7 178:23 214:2 hey 46:10
77:8 80:17 81:12 great 6:16 156:14 221:8 226:12 happy 45:3 63:19 high 62:8,16 66:9
84:16,23 85:17 194:22 guide 54:3 55:24 Harbor 32:23 66:10 67:6 79:1
86:25 87:5 88:2 greatly 97:15 58:7 61:16 221:11 hard 20:25 31:20 79:14 101:12,22
92:23 96:2,16 Grieshaber 1:13 guideline 49:4 35:18,20 84:22,24 101:24 153:18
102:7,8 107:16 6:12,19 15:15 guidelines 42:4,7 87:6 201:24 236:1,17 238:3,5
110:15 114:22 20:1 22:12 31:9 49:13 50:13,16,19 harm 227:23 228:5 higher 80:2 153:11
117:6 118:2,4,13 47:2 51:14 60:6 50:22,25 51:16,19 harms 69:9 154:7 188:17
120:5 132:3 66:1 82:3 123:6 52:5 54:3,5 57:16 Harry 171:16 231:24 232:23
134:10 136:15 218:3 227:5 guides 50:3 57:7 hazard 117:8 239:1,17,21
137:23 138:10 229:25 233:18 Guillory 29:2,14 hazards 118:5 highest 153:17
140:3,4 141:22 235:23 241:3,11 126:13,21 129:22 head 20:5,14 33:23 highlight 22:3
142:10 143:2,3 ground 43:17 130:1 148:8,16,18 38:3 48:23 49:1 149:19
146:4 149:11 45:21,23 81:25 165:8 167:19,24 102:9 104:12 highlighted 17:10
164:23 168:11,25 93:10,12,15,16,17 168:2 197:17,19 123:18 175:21 22:2,5 108:17
170:7 171:25 94:6,11 120:21,23 198:2,7,12 218:14 187:14,15,18 228:14 239:6
173:10 174:25 120:24 121:4 guy 28:21 70:16,21 226:11 231:23,24 highlighting 22:8
181:14,15 185:7 124:18 141:9 89:3 92:9 105:11 231:24 235:3,8,16 highly 97:18 102:9
194:4 198:10,22 142:25 143:23 127:6 129:24 236:3 238:7 102:25
208:14 217:6,10 144:16 173:3 148:9 223:24 239:16 hire 215:9
228:18,20 229:3 179:19 194:25 227:22 hear 67:22 85:21 hired 108:11,12
229:24 230:5,5,7 235:4,5 237:1 guys 46:11 57:8 95:16 118:8 history 49:15
230:22 231:6,6 239:1 58:24 59:2 61:1 heard 83:7 175:13 153:16
232:12 233:22 groundwater 70:10 79:4 88:17 181:24 hit 187:14
234:6 235:10,13 143:24 228:15,18 89:13 150:2 hearing 179:11 hitting 180:14
235:14,22 236:5,8 228:20 230:4,7,9 G-R-I-E-S-H-A-... heavy 192:13 HOGAN 3:12
236:9 237:12 230:21 232:2,6,9 6:13 hold 7:21 82:3

Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285


GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 254

holding 122:16 hopefully 30:1 48:1 156:3 inaccurate 150:11 injected 104:11
hole 43:10 54:24 horizontal 97:13,14 identifying 19:2 inch 176:2,5 injection 187:11
56:18,25 57:4 194:25 221:18 ignorance 47:10 inches 143:19 inner 32:23 187:3
59:9 73:14,18,22 222:2 ignore 76:22 77:1 include 25:9 119:3 input 219:16
73:23 74:2,18,19 hour 8:16 88:16,17 171:15 220:23
75:16,16 76:13,16 hours 8:17 15:7,7,7 ignoring 77:3 included 167:21 inquire 14:4
77:6,7,9,13 78:3 house 29:19 130:3 IHNC 9:14 16:1 200:1 inserted 196:11
81:5,6,9,16,17,17 HPO 6:20 32:8,20 83:3,10 including 105:9 inside 102:16
81:20,22 82:25 HTRW 26:20 83:12,16,17 153:1 inclusive 221:5 instability 97:5
83:2,11,13,15,23 107:20 108:3 153:9 160:8 incomplete 137:3,6 101:9
83:25 84:11 88:9 huh 67:15 148:25 231:24 138:5,8,16 139:7 installation 33:18
89:3,17,21,24 155:11 III 3:13 139:11,25 34:2
90:6,13,20,25 hundred 140:16 III-15 40:17 inconsistent 179:21 installing 36:8
91:5,8,23 92:14 hurricane 23:5,21 III-3 37:5 40:17,21 increase 187:10,11 instantaneously
92:15,17,23 93:13 24:9,13,15 25:13 III-7 40:11 indicate 163:8 176:6
94:10 96:3 101:19 41:23 74:1 101:11 illogical 238:13 191:19 instruct 27:4 67:12
101:25 103:7,22 101:23 106:9 immediately 7:22 indicated 13:20 instructing 64:19
104:20,21,23,24 183:8 185:22,24 142:10 21:3 220:14 instruction 62:13
104:25 105:25 233:5 impact 53:25 56:25 indicates 117:19 68:21
112:20 117:24 hurt 80:17 59:9,17 60:18 118:16 instructs 7:14
118:16 124:16,23 hydraulic 173:4 61:6,13 73:19 Indicating 21:25 integrity 42:9
124:25 125:1,2 hydraulically 76:2,6,8 90:13,24 222:9 53:10 95:21 181:1
128:3 132:25,25 97:13 91:3,8 92:17 indication 128:14 intended 89:17
133:10 134:3,6 hydrostatic 72:21 94:24 102:14 164:20 170:3 interest 52:4
143:2,5 145:7 186:22 187:12 115:25 118:24 177:16 interested 140:24
159:23,25 160:13 188:18 196:10 119:17 136:21 individual 28:11,17 141:2 242:15
166:4 168:10,15 239:25 141:3 144:17 29:19 interesting 193:18
169:1,2 175:10 hypothet 140:1 145:25 147:3 individually 114:16 interface 101:15
177:1,7 188:13 hypothetical 36:14 160:3 168:15 individuals 29:20 interfere 19:13
199:17 202:20 137:3,24 138:6 169:3 173:17 induced 196:9 interlock 230:15
203:2 204:10,15 175:6 180:25 inducing 66:12 interlocks 230:19
204:19 205:5 I impacted 91:15 industrial 19:3 internal 174:4,6
206:4,7,16,17 idea 184:5 211:1,2 94:19 32:4 105:8 107:11 International
208:2,9,18,18 ideal 178:14 impacting 55:16 112:2 113:11 26:18 108:1
217:13,14 219:3 identification 228:7 199:10 232:24 162:23
225:10 237:12,13 11:11,17,22 47:21 impacts 55:14 infiltration 142:22 interpretation
holes 106:7 114:20 94:4 109:7 110:19 74:12,25 144:9 information 31:12 51:19
117:4 120:16 115:12,14 133:6 impervious 72:22 89:6 91:23,25 interpretations
123:8 135:23,24 148:23 151:12 97:12 93:1 114:3 123:21 28:15
142:19 144:8 197:13 198:9 importance 88:14 161:4,5 167:10 interrupt 149:16
166:5 177:3,5 216:5 218:21 important 69:23 198:3 218:17 150:20,23
180:1,18 208:5 234:17 70:1 72:5,9,13 initial 164:9 199:20 interrupting 82:17
225:16,18,24,25 identified 28:10 75:15,17,25 initially 114:15 interruption 82:14
228:3 148:20 149:1 impossible 102:18 178:15 146:21 156:24
holler 7:25 159:15 102:20 103:24 initiated 195:12 intimate 237:21
hope 99:18 identify 6:6 15:1 238:15 initiation 117:11 investigation 142:1

Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285


GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 255

involved 168:24 Joe 18:5 27:2 31:2 199:14 222:10 136:1 140:17,18 3:3 151:9
169:8,19 35:3 108:20 kindly 17:1 140:20,20 142:7,9 Lack 78:5
IPET 30:17,22 109:10 121:24 kinds 111:4 142:11,11,12 lacks 78:16
104:5 154:19 130:23 131:4 Kingman 33:7 147:8,10,21,24 Lafarge 240:15
184:9 191:17 132:16 133:4 KITTO 3:19 148:6,7,9 150:18 Lake 156:9 231:25
isolated 143:5,9 153:1 170:14 knew 114:13 152:6,13,14 237:5
issue 36:21,22 67:9 John 1:12 6:12,19 120:15 212:11 155:23 157:8 land 71:19 72:23
101:10,13 142:13 43:10,15,16 45:20 234:9 159:21,22 165:2 73:3 137:9 199:10
143:25 182:16,23 54:19 241:3,11 know 7:5 8:18,21 165:11 168:11 232:22 233:19
190:12 191:6 join 133:15 10:10 12:10,14 169:21 171:1 239:18
223:21,23 224:1 Joseph 1:24 2:4 13:1,3 14:22 16:7 174:11 176:12,14 landward 73:1
226:8 3:13 5:22 6:25 17:13,16,17 18:2 179:8 180:10,22 Lane's 39:14 40:24
issues 27:22 107:20 242:2,24 18:15 19:11,19 181:16,20,21,22 96:8
168:25 169:1 Jourdan 209:8 20:1,5,6,11 22:11 182:3 183:1,16,19 language 132:4
221:6 223:24 213:8 22:13,22,25 23:18 190:5 192:8,8,8 164:25 193:15,23
Item 18:6 journal 175:15 26:19,19 27:15 197:19 200:11 large 117:15
items 113:10 JR 1:24 5:22 242:2 29:4,24 30:3 31:5 202:11 204:17 179:15
171:15 205:20 242:24 32:14,17 33:16,17 205:18 206:12 late 25:22
I-DEP 3:17 judge 1:6 14:10 33:23 34:1,8,20 207:22 210:8,25 lateral 32:25 33:13
I-wall 38:24 43:12 63:8 35:4 36:4,24 211:11,15 214:2 189:17,20 190:15
99:17 153:11,12 jump 163:24 40:20 42:11,14 215:8 216:23,24 192:24
I-walls 40:2 98:9 June 1:16 241:25 46:8,9 47:2,4,9,14 218:4,24 220:20 law 5:7 86:18,23
98:10,13,19 99:1 JUSTICE 2:12 49:8,15,20 51:25 224:9 225:22 laydown 75:11
99:3,4,7,9,25 53:7,10 57:3,23 226:6,23 227:23 layer 100:19,22
K 57:24,25 58:5 230:3 233:9 239:7 101:3,20 102:1
J Kansas 48:16 61:1 65:6,7,8,14 knowing 114:15 103:23 240:2
January 23:3 51:17 52:7 56:8 70:2,7,22,23 199:2 layman 179:9
Jean 218:14,16 56:17 57:7,15 73:25 75:25 76:20 knowledge 18:19 lays 22:15
JENNIFER 3:3 58:8 77:25 78:11 81:12 23:7 31:11 35:18 lead 66:19
jeopardize 53:9 Katrina 1:4 23:6 81:15,16,17 82:6 43:2 57:15 111:13 leakage 230:15
72:13 206:18 23:11,21 24:13 85:24,24,25 86:1 114:9 127:6 191:4 Leake 1:15 3:4
jeopardizing 74:3,7 25:13 43:13 73:21 87:4 92:1,22 193:25 206:12 6:20
Jerry 42:13,14,16 106:9 183:10 95:18 98:18 100:7 knowledgeable learn 29:25 36:2
42:17 49:16 199:5 184:19 103:16,18 105:4 18:17 29:21 31:16 119:6 140:22
199:6 keep 16:11 37:22 106:5,6,12 108:17 34:9 183:23 233:11,12
Jim 169:21 197:17 64:13,14 78:12 108:24 110:10,11 knows 31:18 learned 213:25
198:25 199:5 144:20 110:13 111:2,24 168:13 194:1 leave 74:19 131:3
217:19 218:15 kind 6:5 11:13 46:2 111:25 112:11,23 229:15 190:17
220:3 223:15,20 53:11 69:4 70:9 112:23 116:11,16 K2 1:5 lecture 86:17 87:11
JOANEN 2:5 30:16 75:19 103:5 104:9 118:3 119:20,25 176:23
30:21 155:13,22 108:4 117:23 120:1 121:17 L Lee 29:2 126:13,20
229:6,10 234:14 124:6 137:22 122:16 123:9 L 5:1 129:21 130:1
job 108:2 185:18 142:12 144:6 125:3,8,12,22 lab 169:17 148:17 165:8
208:24 209:2 156:16 159:25 126:4,19,24 labor 109:16 167:18,24 168:2
210:20 212:6 175:15 178:20 129:10,11,13 laboratory 215:12 198:11 218:14
jobs 29:21,23 179:4 180:16 131:7 133:11,18 LABOURDETTE leeway 27:5 84:14

Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285


GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 256

84:17 85:3 239:14,20 224:2,3,5 36:20 38:16 40:23 lot 31:18 35:13
left 113:10 144:15 levees 25:10 26:14 listed 27:7 64:1 44:5,7 55:17 58:4 102:8 104:5
158:10 202:21 50:14 62:15 72:17 listen 79:13 68:12,14,24 74:4 111:16 112:7,10
223:22 72:20 185:2,9,15 listened 182:11 74:9,14 75:4,20 121:21 157:14
legend 157:21 level 117:13 169:12 lists 214:20 77:7 78:2 80:6,8 176:10 203:2
158:2,11,20 233:2 236:10 LITIGATION 1:5 80:15 93:6 95:25 229:19 233:11
length 17:20 20:8 lift 134:8,13 135:18 little 52:10 57:3 114:5 115:7 116:9 Louisiana 1:2,16
20:13 136:3 159:14 161:9 116:17 154:7 116:19 119:10 2:8 3:5 5:24 6:21
152:18 204:19 169:25 171:8 215:5,5 216:16 120:6 121:13 32:25 33:4,7 47:7
lengthen 36:25 178:12,13 179:2 lives 158:24 124:14,21 125:4,4 242:4
lengths 9:6 lifts 177:15 215:7,7 loaded 37:25 125:13 127:2,16 lousy 114:3
lengthy 33:9 216:18 loading 25:5 33:21 127:17 129:14 low 180:24 232:23
letter 218:17 lightly 80:21 36:18 55:4,8 132:3,6 141:22 233:2,20 235:18
letting 147:4 limit 128:18 70:13 74:2 91:20 145:15,19 149:12 235:25 236:8
171:12 limitation 128:22 loads 25:7 95:19 149:24 152:23 lower 43:11 73:20
let's 13:14 14:25 line 21:4,7 27:3 local 97:22 172:4 155:8,8 156:21,22 75:17 99:17 100:8
22:3 25:19 30:10 29:8 93:10,12,15 208:7 227:8 157:25 158:1,1 101:10 106:8,20
35:16,17 43:8 94:6,6,11,17,18 located 33:6 137:9 174:7 197:20 106:25 118:11
44:5 45:17 65:1 94:22 104:13 140:16 172:25 201:8 204:23 149:17 181:18
69:23 78:20 81:5 119:14,15 120:2,4 183:9 208:12 211:25 182:9 186:7
81:9 82:11 89:12 120:6,12,15,21,23 location 20:8 22:16 224:9 194:18 195:3
98:6,14 99:15 120:25 121:6,8,18 34:13 41:12 looked 32:11 58:20 231:24 233:2,20
100:3,5 101:5 122:11,12,19 100:12 107:17 90:12 91:7,12 238:16
118:15 120:8 123:4,16 124:10 136:22 151:24 116:6,22 117:25 LS 173:3
122:14 124:8,12 124:18,19,20 152:12 160:5 146:6,8 147:19 lumped 100:23
124:13 125:2 144:2 164:21,22 181:17 182:9 182:14,24 209:2 lunch 151:2 225:17
132:6,24 136:4 165:1,14,16 166:7 183:7 184:5 204:4 looking 10:12,20 L-A 96:9
139:22 147:22 166:8,9,16,19 204:13 37:4,24 38:4,9 L-A-N-E 96:10
155:8 156:12 167:2,13,22 locations 152:9 39:19,22 40:11,11
159:14 161:16 168:10 176:18 186:12 71:15 108:23 M
166:21 190:17 179:20 194:25 lock 32:2,8,20,24 115:18 152:7 M 2:4 4:1
202:2,16 203:1 200:19,20,21 33:19 34:13 37:6 155:17 156:4 magistrate 85:20
212:14 218:7 201:1,5 202:16 154:25 155:12 171:6 177:12 maintain 16:10
220:7 226:25 204:7 206:6,23 logical 123:5 182:17,18,25 120:21
234:12 207:3 209:11 long 8:14 44:7,17 187:17 197:10 maintained 97:7
levee 66:19 68:23 210:24,24,25 58:5 68:15 85:14 204:3 221:7 majority 24:20
69:2,5,11 72:24 211:1,4,6,9 113:20 119:12 looks 20:23 56:15 making 56:1 80:18
73:1,2,4,15 75:17 221:11 225:2,4,9 120:3 121:17 100:8 156:6 man 79:14 192:13
80:17 106:9 239:1 136:13 180:10,13 198:15 194:11 211:9
153:10 155:2 link 239:25 204:9 218:23 loose 217:10 Management 229:7
185:1,14 189:1 liquefaction 66:12 224:15 231:22 Lord 231:20 mandate 160:1
190:2,23 202:4 66:16,18,22 67:3 235:12 lose 95:21 mandatory 76:14
203:18 204:7,14 67:6 69:10 longer 177:6 loss 187:14,19 76:14 77:9,12,20
208:3 209:9 213:8 list 58:19 62:25 look 15:21 17:2,5 235:16 238:7 77:21 79:3 80:13
217:7 227:7,24 63:16,18,22,24 22:14 28:14 29:17 lost 102:8 146:19 80:14,19 81:6
228:1 237:6 64:3 139:24 179:1 29:20 31:9 36:17 146:19 88:15,20 173:20

Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285


GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 257

173:24 128:8,11 161:12 187:5 195:4 minus 17:15 name 6:25 169:22
manual 9:10 49:25 229:7 196:22 minute 211:19 217:25
50:1,2,3 51:22 math 124:1 meet 8:10,14 minutes 76:9 named 6:21
52:5 72:16 96:20 matter 71:20 meeting 219:14 misleading 137:4 National 213:20
98:10 99:3,8,25 141:17 157:14 memo 199:22 138:5,17 139:7,12 Nations 214:16
manuals 49:24 158:13 210:9 212:16 139:16,25 natural 178:4
54:5 matters 157:12 225:19 228:19 misread 211:24 179:6 217:11
manufacturers 211:11 238:23 missing 218:2 naturally 215:3
161:13 McDonogh 200:12 memorandum 10:8 Mississippi 38:1 nature 28:10,13
map 22:14 210:15 213:12 154:17 156:8 79:2 198:20 110:8
March 24:9 mean 11:24 31:15 198:17 mistake 149:3,7 Navigation 32:24
marine 112:19 34:18 38:11 44:8 memory 153:15 mitigate 36:22 NCS 197:3 218:11
113:7,11,14 44:16 46:9 75:15 men 179:1 MMG 229:5,8 218:11,12,12
124:23 160:13 104:24 105:23 merit 71:25 141:25 mod 111:5 219:2
210:15 213:13 116:10,21 117:12 merits 88:10 mode 104:8 near 17:19 41:22
mark 11:1,19 120:11,14,25 met 185:18 221:6 modes 104:4 48:9,21 49:5 53:5
130:25 218:7 125:21,23 127:25 224:15 modification 53:8,23 88:9
220:7 234:12 128:18 150:4 Metairie 33:7 111:10 134:4 181:20
marked 11:6,8,10 151:23 153:6 method 192:14,15 modifications 217:4
11:15,16,21 13:21 157:5 164:23 195:13 239:22 113:4 necessarily 52:9
24:3 47:16,20 166:19 167:18 methodology 94:14 modify 56:3 93:12 175:3 231:11
94:2,3 109:6 174:9,12 189:18 102:4 186:19 moisture 215:3,4 necessary 14:16
110:18 115:11,13 189:19,21 192:25 191:19,20 215:8 217:11 34:12 37:21 41:21
130:8 133:5 202:9 203:10 methods 36:23 moment 85:8 120:9 103:20 168:24
148:22 151:11 204:4 208:22 216:11 161:16 necessity 36:8
154:22 197:12 209:25 214:24 Miles 198:15 199:1 Monday 129:24 need 7:20,21 14:25
198:8 218:20 217:23 221:5 199:5 205:17 130:1 18:15 33:8 37:25
234:16 230:7,14 231:5 208:17,21 210:1,6 money 112:8,10,13 43:16 47:3,14
markings 201:22 Meaning 174:8 220:3 Montegut 169:21 63:21 70:10 73:17
married 226:21 means 9:9 35:11 mind 9:24 11:1 197:17 198:2 75:20 84:21 89:6
marsh 100:18,21 54:12 77:9 158:3 22:3 48:1 75:10 months 25:16 26:4 91:22 120:2
101:20,25 103:23 158:6 159:10 117:7 151:8 171:9 morning 6:25 7:9 123:18 136:20
141:25 157:7,10 214:25 233:22 176:18 206:13 144:8 165:20,22 143:5 145:14
157:21 158:11,15 237:4 238:4 231:15 167:5 208:5,20 152:10,13 178:9
mass 113:17 136:9 239:21,21 240:1 mindful 76:1,1,6 212:18 225:17 226:4
match 21:3,6 measure 198:1 mine 128:2 mouth 211:17 needed 144:6
material 67:11 measured 223:11 minimum 38:25 moved 102:13 169:14 224:14
71:5,6 94:16 223:14 39:16 40:25 56:6 movement 67:11 needs 43:18 46:8
113:23 127:22 measurements 119:14 120:2,3,5 183:3 89:9 118:22
128:1,2,12 158:21 117:12 120:23 124:19,20 MRGO 1:7 153:2 negative 144:9
179:12,12,13 measures 97:6,17 164:22 165:1,14 multiple 126:11 147:3
215:1,5 217:9 235:8 165:16 166:7,8,9 myriad 126:4 negatively 59:17
226:15 MEAUX 3:23 166:16 167:1,13 128:10 73:19 226:11
materials 75:12,13 mechanical 215:18 200:20,21,24 net 95:17
97:9,12,21 106:21 mechanics 176:24 201:1 223:6 225:2 N new 1:14,15 2:8 3:5
107:4,6 109:16 mechanism 66:21 225:4 N 4:1,1,1,6 5:1 6:20 24:8 32:2

Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285


GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 258

33:3,4 42:3 49:3 11:9,15,20 14:15 objection 7:12 62:12,13 68:20 74:17 75:2,14,20
59:3 62:4 68:21 14:17,25 15:6,8 23:23 34:16 38:21 69:2 73:9,16 77:1,3,8,18,20,24
93:12 94:12 18:6 21:7,10 24:4 42:23 43:20 45:5 75:18 78:25 119:8 79:12,23 81:12,22
169:13 185:11 33:1,13,14 36:22 45:7 46:14 51:24 168:6 169:10 81:24 83:2,5,19
198:20 208:7 47:16 56:9 71:14 57:14 58:13 62:24 172:4 205:19 83:22 84:9 85:8
219:7 220:16 71:16,17 96:20 63:5 66:5 76:24 208:7 221:23 86:23 88:3,10
news 62:12 68:24 105:6 109:5,9 79:7 80:24 81:11 officer 164:4 89:11,16 90:3,6
NGVD 223:8 111:1 115:10,16 82:17 88:23 offices 1:15 90:10,14 91:1,19
nice 22:4 131:10 122:4 124:17 107:14 110:3 office's 199:13 92:20 94:5,9,21
Nine 73:20 75:17 127:18 130:6,9,13 111:19 125:19 officiated 5:24 95:5,23,24 96:4,5
99:17 100:8 130:15 133:1 133:15 139:1 off-site 127:23 96:11,13,16 97:8
101:10 106:8,20 148:20 151:8 140:7 147:20 oh 68:5 77:9 86:5 98:4 99:5,10,14
106:25 182:10 153:17,17 154:10 189:3 190:7,21 102:21 106:12 99:23 100:10
186:7 194:18 154:23,24,24 191:15 192:19 120:24 122:16 101:18 102:21
195:3 156:8 159:16 193:21 195:7,10 129:16 154:1 103:1,3,19 105:2
nine-year-old 161:3 162:3,13,15 196:4 206:11 158:6 162:11 105:12 108:5,14
140:13 170:16 182:12 227:15 230:13 165:23 170:22 108:24 110:20,25
Ninth 43:11 181:19 202:14 212:15 231:9 233:25 224:3 112:21 113:1,8
194:23 195:23 214:13,20 218:2,8 234:3 okay 7:15,22 8:10 114:6,7,21,25
238:16 224:22 objections 5:11 8:14,18 9:8,16 116:6,20 117:19
NOD 6:20 numbered 113:2 35:25 45:10 63:8 10:16 15:24 16:5 117:22 118:14,15
Nods 7:7 109:22 218:11 63:12 64:18 85:14 16:10,18 18:3 118:21 119:1,5,17
113:9 115:5 numbers 20:10,12 138:22 20:11,15 21:2,9 119:24 120:9,10
155:12 159:9 20:19,20 30:20 objective 66:3 21:20,21 22:7,11 120:14 121:9,10
163:23 204:11 31:1 109:12 observed 194:21 22:16 23:1,9,13 121:16 122:14,18
205:6,23 209:10 132:18 197:2 obtained 127:22 23:17 24:6,17 122:19 123:3,16
222:16,20 223:1 198:6 219:6 obviously 27:17 25:9,12 26:25 124:8,11 126:3,11
non 175:9 numerous 175:19 32:2 41:20 53:22 27:19 29:7 33:22 127:5,17,20,24
normally 152:8 191:18 56:1 85:18 139:1 34:9 35:10,16,17 131:16,20,22
167:17 139:10 170:3,7 36:7,16 37:24 132:7,13,14 134:4
north 16:1 17:24 O 172:1 179:18 38:15,23 39:18 134:5,8 135:22
19:25 105:10 O 4:1 5:1 188:16 203:16 40:1,18,21 41:4,5 136:16 140:11
154:25 186:10,10 oath 5:25 6:23 209:21 220:24 41:13 42:2 43:1,7 141:13,20 142:20
190:24 194:19,23 object 7:11 27:2,12 222:4 224:13 43:9,14,15 44:5 143:16,16 144:13
195:3,24 213:20 35:2,7 36:14 occasions 8:15 44:23,25 46:1 144:14 145:3,5,10
northern 186:11 45:12,14 69:14,19 182:12,12 48:2,16,17 49:10 145:12 146:7,8,19
note 23:3 108:16 71:2 72:7 75:23 occurred 124:2 50:5 52:3,5,12,16 147:1,7 148:6,8
197:25 76:18 77:15 78:5 183:8,10,24 53:13 54:22 55:5 149:15,22 150:20
noted 71:4 77:17 79:19 87:24 102:3 184:19 185:2 55:9,18,18,21 152:15,19,22
195:1 196:6 112:6 133:9 occurring 215:3 56:7,10,12,19 154:11 155:20
210:14 241:13,15 136:24 138:1 October 134:14 57:2 58:2,4,19,22 156:12,14 157:4
notice 5:7 6:2,8 174:2 183:12 offers 183:5 58:23 59:1,21 158:8,23 159:10
11:7 27:23 99:1 231:18 office 3:2 24:9,12 60:3,5,12,23 61:5 159:14,19 160:9
notify 168:13 objected 194:5 24:14 42:18 48:16 61:15,21 62:7,21 161:15 162:17,19
November 23:2 objecting 35:11 49:3,4 51:1,4,18 67:5 70:21 71:18 163:7 164:11,14
number 9:19,21 64:10,13 53:22 58:8 59:3 71:22 72:3 74:5 165:18 166:15,23

Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285


GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 259

167:1,5 168:19 one-ton 173:3 151:6 185:21 161:17 162:18 peat 100:19,21
169:20 170:2,6,12 ongoing 83:22 89:1 199:23 217:23 199:15 216:15 157:22 158:25
171:10 174:9 89:11,14,16 123:9 Orleans 1:14,15 239:11 pen 122:12
175:8,14 177:9 on-site 127:22 2:8 3:5 6:20 24:8 papers 161:9 pending 45:5 66:3
178:5 179:3,20 open 48:23 74:19 32:25 33:3,4 42:3 paragraph 105:6 66:6 233:7
180:4,23 181:11 107:4 128:12 49:3 59:3 68:21 117:7 118:3 penetration 39:7
181:16 182:7,21 opened 196:9 169:14 198:20 218:25 219:1 people 35:25 47:10
183:22 184:11,15 opening 188:18 208:7 227:7 paragraphs 6:9 47:13 69:2 86:18
184:20 185:4,18 operations 29:22 ought 116:22 8:20 132:5 86:22 164:5 165:5
186:2,6,10 187:17 43:3,7 113:8 outside 37:9 50:9 parameter 71:11 165:7,9 166:25
191:24 192:10,14 opinion 189:5,23 73:25 110:3 120:3 parameters 84:5,7 167:3,9 181:22
194:7,16 195:2 190:10,20,22 139:23 169:9 87:14,19 191:18 233:3
196:7,15,20,25 191:24 193:5 192:20 paraphrasing people's 238:6
197:4,14 198:12 194:17 239:13 overall 95:25 184:17 perceive 170:4
198:22,25 199:1,2 opportunity 174:23 119:11 147:19 Parish 32:25 percent 157:18
199:21 200:5,8,14 opposed 174:10 overbreadth 42:24 part 5:14 26:20,22 214:20,21,22
201:4,9,16 202:19 188:19 overburden 177:8 32:6 46:15,16,17 215:11,20,23,24
203:6,9 204:2,12 opposing 213:25 177:9 46:21,23 56:8 216:18,19,20
204:17,22 205:3 opposite 38:2 oversaw 28:7 60:8 89:17 90:7 perfect 125:23
205:10,14,21,25 optimum 214:22 overseeing 26:24 103:13 127:14 perform 75:18
206:1 207:4,8,25 215:4 216:20 oversight 29:24 151:5 153:2,8 215:18
208:15 209:3,19 options 213:15,17 overtopping 186:8 164:8 172:17 performed 39:14
210:5,11,13,18,19 order 17:3 28:5 overturning 39:3 176:10 181:9 185:3,9
210:22 211:2,8 37:21 51:2,9 39:11 203:8 204:25 performing 51:2
212:5,14,22 55:15 70:24 72:4 owns 228:10 208:18 212:25 178:11
213:10,18 214:6,7 92:25 103:4,20 213:3 period 62:17
214:12 215:24 110:1 111:6 P partial 171:10 permeability 97:15
217:15 218:22 112:15 156:18 P 5:1 94:2 particle 187:3 97:16,21 159:3,8
219:14,15 220:5 164:9,16,18,25 package 116:17 particular 6:9 8:20 permeable 159:2
220:16 221:10,24 167:7 181:10 page 4:3,8 8:2 9:5 10:12 20:7 29:17 240:2
224:11 225:15 224:6 225:22,23 21:12,19,23 37:5 47:23 48:19 51:1 permissible 74:18
226:1,2,16,25 organic 100:20,24 38:16 48:7 58:1 51:8 127:12 128:7 permit 42:21 43:3
227:19 228:8,9,23 101:17 102:8,16 113:1,2 117:5 128:14 129:11 46:4,6,9,12 47:3,9
229:4,13,23 230:1 107:1 157:11,12 132:6 136:5 149:11 47:14 60:17 79:24
230:3 231:22 157:14,21 158:3,7 149:10 155:10 particularly 12:6 227:13
234:18,19 235:2,7 158:13,24 195:17 159:16 161:3 97:20 permitted 5:5
235:13,17,20 organics 100:14,18 162:7 170:16,22 parties 5:3 30:12 permitting 46:14
236:3,12,24 158:22 170:24,24 171:2,4 242:14 46:23
237:18,20 238:1 organization 26:22 184:14,16 201:22 pass 30:10,13 101:2 perpendicular
238:22,23 239:10 26:23 163:6,11,13 202:22 203:11 passed 188:6,8 223:12,14
240:5 organizational pages 219:7 passing 188:4,9 person 6:6 29:13
once 7:8 172:2,9 27:23 paper 11:20 13:8 passive 95:17 31:17 34:9 47:2
192:19 organized 29:9 57:18,21 60:19 path 36:25 68:2 62:2 120:15
ones 155:7 original 5:9 94:10 92:11 96:19 102:7 187:20 personal 7:21
one-size-fits-all 114:2 131:17,19 116:17 119:7 188:14,21 57:15 191:4
71:16 80:11 131:25 141:23 129:13 134:7 PAVLICK 3:15 206:12

Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285


GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 260

personally 103:12 187:15 196:21 100:9 109:4 111:1 133:18,20 142:10 172:6 209:23
104:2 230:8,9,14 231:7 130:6,9 133:1 187:20 201:4,19 pounds 215:16
perspective 191:3 232:13,16,20 134:9 148:20 202:10 204:1,3 practice 86:18,23
pertain 222:4 233:23 234:19 159:16 161:2 210:21 223:17,18 169:13,16 205:25
PERTAINS 1:7 piles 96:19 141:10 179:22 196:25 235:16 239:3 practices 97:23
pervious 72:19,25 142:16 143:15,17 218:8 pointing 150:9 precise 49:22
97:10 106:24 143:19 145:14 Plaintiff's 110:15 points 29:5 177:16
107:2,3 171:21,23,24 plan 16:12 19:6 policies 81:8 prefatory 133:20
phone 82:4 172:5,10,25 173:2 22:14 116:19 ponding 223:5 preparation 8:11
photos 114:2 173:2,5,10 174:22 117:8 118:3,5 238:16 9:3 107:11 111:12
phrase 184:24 175:5,9 180:6,14 134:13 147:19 Pontchartrain 148:15
phrased 68:18 piling 113:19 154:17 161:9 156:9 231:25 prepare 109:19
Ph.D 1:13 6:19 135:22,25 136:3 170:1 171:14,19 237:6 prepared 33:2,4
241:3,11 136:18,22 140:19 172:13,15 206:22 popped 195:25 48:15 51:17 150:6
picture 207:15 141:3 142:19,19 plans 9:11 18:7,10 pore 187:4,10,11 189:11,14
234:7 143:12 145:2,23 18:25 20:4,7 196:8 present 3:8,17 18:6
pictures 114:3,4 146:15,24 172:2 22:25 23:2,25 port's 113:11 97:11 106:24
piece 11:19 13:8 172:19,21 174:21 36:5 92:22 93:4 position 144:3,5,11 213:9,13
57:18,21 60:19 177:4 180:19 93:10 109:19,24 145:13 146:13 presented 46:22
92:10 119:7 pilings 113:21 115:3 146:12,14 147:1 190:4 183:1 191:17
123:21 129:13 136:12 140:25 146:17 152:9 positive 220:22 pressure 95:18
161:17 162:17 175:1 164:9 possibility 29:3 101:17 102:11
199:14 216:15 pink 22:3,8,12 94:9 plate 37:5,24 38:3 66:11 72:1 74:1 176:25 177:8,9
239:11 94:17,18 228:14 38:5 39:23,24 102:1 119:10 186:22 187:3,4,10
pieces 134:7 pipe 16:24 23:10 40:2,9 154:23,23 124:13 209:25 187:11,12 188:19
piezometer 235:2,7 236:20 154:24 155:16 possible 11:24 195:13 196:9,11
236:4 237:2 piping 39:17 41:1 plates 39:10,19,20 35:12 40:15 237:18,19,24,25
238:25 72:23 39:21 40:17 101:21 238:2
pile 9:6 17:4,7,19 pit 197:21,24 198:3 155:15 possibly 34:11 36:4 pressures 72:22
19:2,17 20:1 200:4,8,12,25 play 44:8 66:25 69:11 73:18 99:19 95:17 97:3,7
22:20 33:18 34:2 201:10 203:14 68:15 196:1 136:16 101:7,24 141:12
36:8 37:17,21,22 204:23 207:10,12 played 183:25 posted 47:5 188:17
38:2,7,13,18 39:1 212:12 219:3 playing 32:16 posts 222:21 226:5 presumably 152:17
39:11,21 41:2 pits 197:23 please 21:17 61:8 226:7 presuming 18:18
50:20 66:12 67:5 place 23:11 42:3 83:20 93:14 144:4 post-Katrina 104:4 pretty 155:1 157:6
69:3 91:20 99:13 43:12 52:9,10 151:7 156:4 potential 36:9 174:13 221:5
113:19 134:7 55:19 59:6 60:2 plotted 197:22 53:25 69:4,8 previous 34:22,23
136:11 141:6,8,10 62:1,5 85:17 94:7 plug 176:15 70:11 76:15 79:14 previously 13:19
144:15 145:11 195:16 209:9 plus 8:17 17:14 100:11,14 101:2 pre-Katrina 37:10
147:3,5 149:14,24 230:18 171:15 204:6 101:10 144:9 primarily 178:17
150:13,20,21,23 placed 41:22 POC 223:15,17 147:2 159:11 primary 96:25
150:24 157:9 222:14 point 22:23,24 160:3 168:15 187:23,24
171:17,18 173:4 places 125:12 27:14 53:16 57:6 173:17 180:4 principles 78:2
175:17,22 176:7 Plaintiff 13:21 63:21 68:20 71:12 185:13 227:22 99:16 124:5
180:2,3,5,6 Plaintiffs 2:2 20:15 75:2 80:18 104:17 228:4 205:24
186:20,21 187:13 24:3 47:16 56:9 104:18 126:20 potentially 41:25 printout 40:7

Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285


GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 261

prior 108:4 117:10 profile 105:18 prove 182:19 Q quickly 44:5


214:22 121:13 provide 11:14 12:8 question 5:12 7:15 quit 117:18
privilege 14:7 profiles 151:18 12:16 53:1 103:25 8:1 31:8,22,25 Quite 182:16
probably 31:17 152:14 206:23 221:22 32:13 34:23,24 quote 175:20
47:10 48:24 52:21 program 39:12 provided 13:21,25 35:1 37:12 43:23 quoting 99:8
71:16 102:4 160:9 40:1 14:5 40:1,6,9,17 44:10,25 47:17
161:5 171:23 progress 206:18 171:18 218:9 R
49:13 55:21,23
178:23 206:15 prohibited 178:6 provides 53:3 59:2 61:1 64:5 R 3:12
221:6 project 26:24 32:24 PT 197:21 70:3,6 72:4,9 rail 178:15,19
problem 10:17 37:7 48:11,22 publication 175:15 73:15 78:16,21,23 rainfall 217:6
13:5 41:10,25 49:6 58:10 89:1 pull 18:10,16 96:19 84:10 89:13 98:8 raise 133:25
102:11 114:6 176:11 182:19 98:5 135:25 100:6 107:16 raising 133:23
121:18 165:17 185:22,23 141:10 142:21 108:19 111:23 range 132:17
202:8,12 213:9,14 projects 51:10 171:21 175:17,22 118:14 126:11,14 134:18,23 237:10
232:21 56:22 176:6 226:6 126:18 133:17 ranges 131:11
problems 28:9 promote 69:9,10 pulling 99:24 136:17 138:25 rarely 175:23
29:11 30:3 72:25 properties 75:13 142:16 144:15 139:20 141:4 ratio 39:7,15 40:25
133:8 137:10,14 proposal 115:7 172:5 143:10 145:5 96:8,12,13 178:4
137:18,22 170:5 129:13 131:15,18 punctured 101:20 146:20 148:7 Reach 153:24
procedure 5:6 54:9 132:10 162:21 purpose 47:17 58:7 152:20 155:5 154:1
54:12 55:19,22,24 164:1 171:7 134:11 159:23 162:16 reaches 149:14
106:18 proposed 34:13 purposes 5:5 31:10 163:7,15,16 172:1 150:13
procedures 42:4 48:9,21 49:5 32:21 34:2 136:17 183:17,23 185:6,7 reaching 117:15
48:25 52:9 81:8 55:25 56:14 58:9 173:15 175:4 194:8 196:13 118:10
174:4,6,15,16,17 59:16 60:6,11 235:15 200:3 205:17 reaction 66:23
proceed 27:11 61:2,4,7,11,13 pursuant 5:7 6:3 207:21 208:13 read 20:25 31:2
139:4 69:24 70:4,7,9 81:7 209:20 218:19,22 56:20 58:1 111:16
process 30:5 38:6 71:12 163:19 push 177:25 218:25 219:23,23 115:20 116:21
54:7,8 56:16 57:8 170:8 178:16 put 45:23 50:11 220:4 221:5 117:6 118:2,7
58:8 59:5,10,12 209:5 210:15 54:19 81:25 223:20 229:24 170:15 200:10
59:14,15,20,24 213:5,12 101:16 109:9 231:4 233:7,11,13 221:12 235:3
60:8,11,14,16 protected 62:15 134:10 180:6 234:1 reading 5:8 21:3
61:17,19 91:18 233:19 238:17 193:24 196:17 questioner 138:24 37:17 96:17 127:3
94:22 95:13 239:14,15,20,23 210:24,25 211:1 questioning 27:3 172:23 193:15,23
103:13 106:17 protection 19:4 214:15 215:5,6 questions 7:23 228:23 229:19
126:23,24,25 24:9,16 33:1,13 217:9 221:8 19:10,17 51:13 235:19 237:2,3
174:15,16,17 36:10 41:23 42:6 226:13,14,14 64:10 65:9,15 reads 236:4
228:23 42:10 43:12 47:8 235:2,7 237:1 81:20 84:6 87:8 ready 219:13
processes 48:25 71:8 72:12,14 putting 45:20 89:9 131:24 real 7:19 101:11
52:8 90:25 92:18 116:1 204:21 214:25 132:10 135:17,19 128:22 143:4
Proctor 214:21 119:17 140:21 P&S 9:5,11 135:23,24 160:12 179:7 205:11
215:11,11,15,17 141:4 146:1 P-8 130:21 180:1 220:1 224:8 217:10 231:3
215:22,25 216:4 181:18 182:10 P.E 1:13 6:19 241:3 227:4 realize 85:11
216:19 183:7 199:18 241:11 quick 38:16 40:23 175:21
produce 9:23 10:1 207:13 208:3,6 P.O 2:16 145:5 really 8:21 10:10
product 14:7 228:7 29:1 31:16 36:1

Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285


GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 262

38:10 58:5 85:5 redesigning 61:22 relate 21:18 45:10 removes 141:2 requirements 28:6
95:16 109:3 110:5 redirect 240:10 related 27:22 removing 71:5 43:3
133:11 138:14 reduce 55:7 242:14 108:2 180:2 requires 46:6
141:13 142:15 reduced 196:7 relates 25:10 Rent 213:20 214:16 159:24 208:7
184:7 189:8 reevaluating 62:4 192:22 rephrase 8:1 requisite 127:6
202:12 226:24 refer 39:18 169:4 relative 105:8 144:12 research 169:17
234:10 196:17 183:9 202:17 replacement 32:24 182:19
reason 37:23 67:13 reference 20:7,16 relatively 73:2 37:6 reserve 240:10,15
138:21 150:18,19 21:14 29:5 51:2 97:11 report 33:1,24 34:7 reserved 5:13
169:18 183:22 54:4 121:6 156:18 relax 106:3 38:12,21 104:6 191:16
227:21 232:19 161:1 200:13 release 68:25 184:9,16 reserving 7:12
reasons 35:13 referenced 17:14 relevant 231:12,16 reported 1:23 respect 78:19 160:6
rebar 113:18,24 23:25 24:2 231:21 62:12 206:24 207:18
136:11 referencing 134:3 rely 93:2 167:25 Reporter 1:25 5:23 210:3,16 213:14
rebuilding 24:15 referred 16:6 114:8 relying 16:22 102:24 242:3,25 respectfully 46:19
recall 10:8,11 151:4 219:2,11 150:19 REPORTER'S respond 29:11
28:24 184:21 224:22 remarks 113:13 242:1 responding 198:7
receive 176:21 referring 15:25 remarried 226:20 reporting 233:3 response 6:8 25:5
received 127:1 28:17 100:18,24 remedial 205:22 reports 19:2 115:23
recess 53:19 93:23 107:3 117:4 169:5 209:5 213:5 represent 8:7 48:14 responsibilities
218:5 227:2 170:17 201:25 remediation 108:2 representative 27:22
recharge 232:10 refers 21:13 108:6 199:12 90:17 responsible 26:24
recognize 60:7 reflect 16:23 23:10 228:16,17,18,19 REPRESENTING responsiveness
recollection 108:13 65:11 117:3 remember 47:22 2:2,11 3:1 5:12
recommendations 122:10 123:25 48:24 54:18 62:7 represents 21:22 rest 40:22
28:14 219:18 124:2 143:11 62:11,17 108:9 request 29:18 restricting 29:16
recommended 148:2 109:3 110:5 110:4 127:1 193:7 Resubmit 171:14
214:23 reflected 119:8 135:20 136:2 212:15 217:24 result 72:20 97:2
record 9:9 11:7 212:24 153:16 184:22 requested 210:12 101:6 184:19
13:17,20 15:24 reflects 17:19 24:7 210:6 225:24 requester 206:13 186:21 188:17
16:2 19:16 25:2 regard 7:23 27:17 232:25 requesting 219:16 196:8 216:10
32:22 47:25 48:5 53:2,4 77:13 remotely 144:5 220:23 239:17 242:16
49:19 64:20 65:11 111:11 117:6,14 removal 108:11 requests 29:12 resulted 188:25
75:9,10 80:19 118:8 134:7 144:3 112:18 115:3 195:8 199:13 resulting 127:19
85:13 86:19 88:8 144:9 145:22,24 127:19 134:8,13 require 46:2,4 52:8 results 39:21 40:7
88:9 93:25 108:16 158:10 160:13 136:22 140:24 60:8 124:5 164:10 40:15 93:12
117:6 122:10,20 177:3 185:1 144:3 145:22 164:24 180:17 retaining 50:17
130:4 131:7 188:22,24 195:2 147:3,5 159:15 required 45:12 52:14,15 96:21,22
133:21 139:23 Regardless 228:10 170:1 171:14,18 50:10 90:21 91:15 98:11,14 160:24
154:22 162:15 regards 32:1 41:21 172:21 175:5 109:16 160:16,19 returned 170:1
224:21 54:14 112:18 177:4 180:19 160:22 164:6,13 review 9:2 91:3
records 126:19,21 147:23 remove 135:20,21 164:15,15,17,20 109:17 160:1
126:22 regional 169:11 171:8 173:10 168:13,19 172:22 168:21 173:11,24
recycled 113:24 register 110:11 174:23,25 227:12 179:22 222:7
recyclers 113:23 reinforced 98:24 removed 113:21 requirement 78:25 reviewed 9:5 90:24
redefine 166:21 113:18 136:11 142:19 222:21,23 177:22 172:12,13 173:22

Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285


GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 263

191:18 222:10 58:22 59:7 60:4 150:3,4,15,17 222:2,5,9,15,19 S


reviewing 58:18 61:17,21,25 62:11 151:1 152:11 222:25 223:10 s 5:1 42:16 57:16
178:9 62:21 65:1 66:14 153:2 154:4,9,21 224:4,18 225:8 74:7 126:21
reviews 146:17 66:24 67:4,12,15 155:7,14,17 226:3,15,16,22 129:22 179:9
revised 134:13 67:19 69:6,8 70:5 156:11,15 157:1,3 227:4,9,11 228:25 190:21 204:1
161:9 169:25 70:15,19,21 71:10 157:8,13,17,23 230:17 232:5 217:25 229:8
171:14,19 71:18,22 72:3,15 158:5,12,18,21 234:21 235:1,3,8 safeguard 146:16
revisit 61:18 94:13 73:5,8,10,12,14 159:2,4,8,12,20 235:8,21 236:6,12 safely 209:14
106:18 74:8,11,15 75:14 160:7,11 161:8 236:16 237:11,23 safety 39:16 41:1
revisiting 61:23 76:8 77:6 79:16 163:24 164:14 238:12,19 239:10 48:6 56:6 91:16
RFP 116:9 79:22 80:1,4,22 165:3,10 167:12 239:19 240:1,3,5 94:20 96:15
Rich 213:25 81:18 83:21 87:1 167:20,25 168:16 rights 240:15 120:20,22 226:8
Richard 2:14 3:15 88:20 89:4,8,9,13 168:23 169:24 right-of-way 97:22 Salvage 113:23
9:18 11:2 15:5 89:20 90:20 91:9 170:10 171:12,22 risk 133:8 samples 161:12
44:9 68:10 85:8 91:11 92:1,4,19 172:7,9 173:18,21 river 38:1 62:9 sand 72:23 101:20
85:25 86:16 87:3 92:25 93:21,25 173:24 174:5,6 66:10 79:2,23,25 103:22 134:1
87:11,12,21 154:4 94:8 95:11 98:4 175:11,20,25 riverward 73:2 159:5 222:23
183:18 189:18 99:2,13 100:5,17 176:3,17 177:2,12 Road 209:5 213:5 sands 102:7 107:4
190:21 197:7 100:20 101:1,5,9 177:17,21 178:2 roadside 197:23 141:24
204:1 102:17 103:6,9,15 179:10,17,20 roadway 204:5,5 sandy 178:17
right 7:11,18 8:5 103:19 104:7,13 180:13 181:2,8,24 Robert 3:9 240:14 179:12,12
9:1,13 10:19,22 104:15,25 105:20 182:5,13 183:6 ROBINSON 1:7 sand/clay 107:5
11:4 13:19 14:2 106:19 107:7,19 184:8,24 185:5,14 Rock 52:10 Satterlee 49:16
15:14,19 16:6,13 107:24 108:10,12 185:17,20,25 role 26:9 66:25 198:7 199:6,6
16:15,22,24 17:1 109:4 110:22 186:4,8,15 188:3 184:1 186:16 210:9 220:4
17:9,17 18:3 20:6 111:8,11 112:17 188:5 192:7,10 196:1 Saucer 225:18
20:11,24 22:1,10 115:4 116:15 193:25 194:2 roll 177:22 save 5:8,11
22:18,22 23:1 117:1,21 118:9,11 195:19 196:1,25 roller 215:19 saw 91:14 197:7
24:6 25:19,24 118:19 120:12,16 197:16 198:14 rolling 215:8 215:25
26:7 27:9,14 28:3 121:1,5,13,19 199:8,18,21 200:3 RONALD 3:19 saying 44:15 52:22
28:16,20,24 32:10 122:13 123:1,10 200:15,23 201:3,5 rotate 95:21 96:3 57:11 74:20 78:12
32:21 33:25 35:9 123:16,22,24 201:6,8,13,15,17 rotational 195:25 83:2 90:21 92:12
35:22 37:15,20 124:2,6,14 125:15 201:19 202:4,6,6 route 101:21 99:6,24 104:22
39:9,10,20,25 126:6 127:10,17 202:10,13,20,22 103:25 118:1 119:12
40:4,10,11,19 127:21,25 128:4 202:24 203:8,14 RPR 1:24 5:22 120:24 125:22
41:7,10,20,25 128:16,20 129:4,5 204:10 205:15,16 242:2,24 142:2 156:20,21
42:11 43:5,8 129:8,10 130:15 206:4,8,21,25 rule 1:10 6:3 14:20 158:13 166:12
45:16 46:6,7,25 130:16,19,20 207:14,15 208:11 53:11 61:19 179:14,15 199:9
47:15,25 48:18 132:14,22,24 208:25 210:5,23 rules 5:6 6:4 7:5,19 201:23 215:17
49:2,18,22 50:10 136:20 141:7,11 212:2,3,5,12,23 47:5 says 16:18 17:7,10
50:12,14,20,23 141:13,21 142:1 214:5,9,9 215:14 ruling 7:12 21:4,5,6,15 24:17
51:4,7,10,12 52:3 142:17 143:1,8,20 215:21 216:7,12 run 91:19,22 94:18 33:12 38:25 40:24
52:24 53:4,13,25 143:21 144:10 216:14 217:1,12 95:2 96:7 211:8,9 46:10 56:21 58:17
54:15 55:2,12 145:12 146:23,25 217:17 218:7 230:11 98:14 101:5
56:13,14,16,18 147:7,11,12,17,22 219:21 220:25 runoff 223:5 105:18 109:14
57:1,9,18 58:16 148:15 149:9,23 221:10,14,21 ruts 217:8

Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285


GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 264

113:3 115:1 117:5 section 17:5 21:15 36:22,25 37:1 141:6 169:10 178:8 182:15
117:8,14 118:12 21:22 24:5 26:11 38:9,11,17,25 242:7 202:14 218:18
127:21 131:20 26:12 48:7 98:19 39:8,13,15 40:8 Shakes 226:11 showed 9:6 12:19
136:5,9 149:12 126:17 127:13,14 40:16 41:9 50:22 shaking 123:18 showing 37:4 116:3
150:12 152:11 127:16 171:16 67:10 68:2,3 75:1 shallow 209:22 153:10,14 157:10
154:25 155:2 201:12,15 212:16 95:6,7 96:6,7,15 share 7:8 10:16 201:12,15 202:9
157:20 158:11,12 sections 26:13 96:23,24,25 97:2 25:2 208:11 221:23
158:17 159:16 176:13 97:5,7 101:6 shear 196:7 shown 9:4 32:22
161:11 164:2 see 15:21 17:9 20:4 104:10 119:4 sheepsfoot 215:19 213:16
165:1 169:25 20:20 22:25 23:24 123:13 143:25 sheet 16:24 17:4,7 shows 15:16 110:11
172:23 177:13 24:5 25:19 29:11 147:24 156:18 17:19 19:2,17 157:6 202:13
178:9 184:16 29:22 33:20,20 160:18 188:9 20:1 21:23 22:20 238:25
185:21 193:10 36:19 37:16,17 196:18 212:22 23:10 33:18 34:2 side 29:18 38:3
197:19 199:12 38:16 49:18 51:14 213:3 36:8 37:17,21,22 40:3 62:15 71:19
203:10 204:23 51:21 55:14 56:5 sees 199:6 38:1,7,12,18,25 71:19,21 72:23
206:22,23 209:4 56:7,11 61:6 seismic 66:23 39:11,12,21,22,23 73:3,23 75:16
210:10,17 213:11 69:23 74:22,23,24 SELA 176:11 40:5 41:2 50:20 83:3,10,12,16
214:3,16,20 74:24 76:4 80:6 selected 8:19 91:20 99:13 87:5 93:17,17
220:19,23 221:10 91:15 96:1 98:7,9 117:10 149:14,24 150:13 94:7 106:8 121:14
221:14 228:20 98:14,25 99:1,10 selection 97:17 150:20,21,23,24 130:3 140:21
229:8 239:2,5,11 99:15 100:5 101:5 semi-compacted 157:9 171:18 152:20 155:5,21
scale 122:15,17 111:5 114:1 215:2 216:22,24 174:22 175:5,22 156:13,14 160:8
204:21 120:24 124:15 217:4 186:20,21,24 184:2 185:13
scenario 102:10 125:5,24 131:13 send 29:20 127:8 187:13,14 196:11 186:8,10,11 188:8
123:15 132:11 136:4 sense 7:25 21:6 196:21 230:8,9,14 194:24 195:24
scheme 32:7,19 142:13 149:23 45:11 78:24 88:13 231:7 232:13,16 203:2 206:17,24
97:18 150:4 152:8,9,11 121:22 123:8 232:20 233:23 207:3,9,11,12
scientific 175:16 153:10 156:12 sent 198:18 213:19 234:19 208:1 210:7,16
scope 110:4 111:20 158:16 160:6,9 sentence 43:6 sheeting 209:13 213:14 232:22
111:22 195:7 161:14 169:18 149:11 150:11,11 sheets 36:24 171:24 233:19 237:15
SCOTT 2:5 3:12 197:16 199:4 separate 98:19 ships 34:5 238:17,24 239:14
scouring 185:13 201:8 202:6,16 163:13 222:7 shocked 112:4 239:16,20,24
scratched 210:23 203:1 206:22 225:19 shop 129:22 161:11 sides 96:24 209:2
screwed 40:14 210:24 211:19 September 219:15 163:2 212:11
script 86:22 213:17 214:2,13 sequence 171:15 shoring 178:15,19 sign 46:9
sea 117:12 214:15 218:18 seriatim 40:22 209:14 signed 164:2,4,5
seam 195:20,20 221:4 228:17,22 110:16 130:7,10 short 25:15 194:9 241:11,13,15
season 74:1 232:8 239:19 134:14 149:9 shorthand 242:9 significance 108:18
seawall 39:12,22,23 240:7 series 134:9 136:18 short-circuit significant 97:10
40:5 seeing 38:10 47:22 served 24:17 101:16 106:24
second 8:17 33:12 seeks 236:10 113:15 shovel 216:1 signing 5:9
115:17 134:12 seen 24:24 47:6,18 services 33:8 51:3 show 17:1 22:20 silly 140:12
163:25 185:7 48:14,19,20 52:13 109:15 40:12 47:15 52:12 silt 178:17
209:9,16 228:24 52:18 109:1 set 20:4 28:5 36:5 63:19 72:20 silts 141:24
secondary 67:25 175:25 238:15 42:3 54:2 87:8,14 110:15 116:13 silty 179:12
116:11 seepage 36:20,21 107:21 115:2 148:19 149:10 simple 7:19 13:10

Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285


GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 265

147:5 159:23 216:3 221:15 span 194:9 210:17 147:23 226:8


231:3 222:17,19,22,22 speak 8:19 18:7 stack 155:25 Stick 64:22
simplistic 105:3 229:9 240:2 82:8 189:4,12 stage 79:23,25 80:2 sticks 43:16
simply 33:12 54:3 soils 25:5,7,8 75:12 190:8,11 staged 173:6 stint 25:15
58:6 76:22 78:2 128:7,7 178:1,17 speaking 6:10 9:15 standard 38:23 STIPULATED 5:2
146:13 204:12 178:20 43:25 63:7,12 185:21,23 216:22 stipulation 6:22
sinking 37:22 somebody 81:23 191:5 staple 131:5 Stockpiles 222:12
sir 6:25 22:18 83:24 117:20 speaks 38:21 58:13 start 22:23 35:16 stone 2:14 6:11
28:24 48:18 50:12 118:16 119:6 spec 216:11,18,21 71:12 78:20 81:9 9:20,25 10:14
51:7 78:19 109:1 120:11 127:11,12 217:1,2 145:11 171:12,20 11:3 14:3,11,19
139:5 127:15 130:2 specific 31:22,25 203:4 14:23 15:9 18:4
sit 147:7 148:5,11 149:6 81:19 97:19 99:18 starting 134:23 18:20 19:5,12,20
site 29:10,15,16 165:2 206:8 120:7 185:16,20 starts 144:16,18,19 23:22 27:1,10
32:5 34:14 97:19 210:23 216:17 201:22 216:18,21 144:23 30:11 31:14,21
107:11 109:17 226:8 specifically 5:10 state 5:23 179:6 34:15,21 35:6
112:2,19 113:7,22 someplace 89:4 18:11 52:22 53:4 242:3 36:5,13 38:20
123:10 143:12 118:7 128:3 54:8 105:5 113:1 stated 147:21 214:8 42:22 43:19 44:4
145:16,23 149:13 217:16 234:22 117:5 192:22 statement 38:24 44:11,18,22 45:4
150:12 199:12 Somewhat 184:10 specification 82:23 110:23 45:13 46:13,20
225:17,18 sorry 13:24 20:22 128:24 177:17 111:9 115:23 51:23 53:14 57:13
sites 105:10 22:19 25:25 92:5 216:6 133:13 58:12 62:23 63:3
sits 93:19 95:9 130:15,20 specifications 18:8 statements 54:5 63:9,13,20,25
situ 226:15 134:17 135:16 19:1 90:15,16 states 1:1,11,12 64:8,15,21,25
situation 30:3 36:3 140:25 144:18 93:4,11 109:20,24 2:11,12 72:18 65:10,17,21 66:2
79:3 101:11 152:10 162:11 111:12 115:3 88:7 90:18 140:23 67:14,18 68:7,11
sixty 142:8 164:3 170:14 129:1 146:18 141:1 68:17 69:13,18
sketch 114:2 172:23 174:21 219:4 stating 238:11 71:1 72:6 75:22
slab 113:7,8 188:23 197:21 spent 24:21 station 2:17 20:10 76:17,23 77:14
slide 178:15,18 218:3,24 219:1 spoke 95:3 104:8 20:12,18,20 22:2 78:4,15 79:6,18
sliding 195:14,15 223:12 226:16 spoken 189:12 22:5 134:8,13 80:23 81:10 82:7
sliver 176:5 sort 51:18 sponsoring 227:8 135:18 153:16,17 82:14,21 84:12,18
slope 203:17,18 sought 5:15 7:13 stability 38:4 39:3 159:15 161:9 84:25 85:10,19
221:18 222:2 sound 77:23 124:5 39:20,23 41:6 169:25 171:8 86:2,6,12,24 87:7
223:3 225:7 230:23 54:11 55:14 74:7 178:12,14 179:1,2 87:13,18,23 88:4
slopes 26:15 203:13 source 127:23,23 74:25 95:4,5,8,10 stationing 153:14 88:22 102:2 106:2
203:21 204:2 196:19 95:11,13,15,24 stations 20:17 107:13 108:15
222:1 south 15:23 16:1 119:4,4 123:13,14 21:16,18 152:15 110:2 111:18
slow 61:8 17:19 18:1 20:9 144:17 147:24,25 stay 64:16 88:2 112:5 116:2
smooth 223:2 105:10 132:25 156:19,20 160:16 120:3 121:17 125:18 129:25
soft 157:21 158:24 133:10 134:4 160:21,24 173:23 180:22 130:11,22 131:2
soil 45:24 172:24 155:11 186:6 201:5 206:3,9,19 stayed 119:12 131:23 133:7,19
175:23,23 176:5 spacing 143:14 206:23 207:2 stays 95:22,22 136:6,23 137:2,7
176:24 177:11 Spadaro 218:14,16 209:4,11 210:4 235:12 137:13,21 138:4,9
178:10,13 179:4,8 220:19 226:17 212:17,18,19 steel 113:6,17,20 138:15,22 139:6
192:23 209:5,15 spade 43:16 45:20 213:1,1,2,3,9,13 113:24 136:10 139:18 140:2,8
213:6 215:15,19 45:23 54:19 81:25 stable 96:1 207:18 step 52:23,23 151:13,19 152:1

Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285


GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 266

152:25 153:7 structural 26:12 116:10,11 164:7 166:18 175:19 226:25


154:13 161:18,23 97:5 101:9 206:3 164:10,12,17 176:19 196:13 taken 5:5 6:3
162:12 165:25 206:9 209:4 222:7 200:22 202:8 107:21 108:3
174:1 183:11 structure 27:23 submittals 164:13 207:18 227:6 197:21 204:1
189:2,9 190:6 36:10 41:22,23 submitted 90:8,10 230:23 241:25 242:8
191:2,12 192:18 42:6,20 59:18 109:20,24 117:10 Surekote 209:5 takes 131:4 175:23
193:1,6,14,20 70:12 73:19 88:10 171:19 213:5 177:6 178:3
194:3 195:6 196:3 94:25 114:8 136:1 Subparagraph surface 38:8,13 230:18
197:9 203:19 140:16,22 141:4 113:2 142:3,22 144:17 talk 35:14 54:8
206:10 211:4,5,10 144:10,24,25 subsequent 113:3 172:11 181:20 84:3,4 105:6
213:25 217:20 146:1 160:4,25 subsidence 183:2 204:20 217:4 112:13 120:8
220:6,11 227:14 168:16 173:17 substantive 182:16 223:3,3 236:13,14 124:13 132:24
229:12,16 230:12 179:16 180:8,11 subsurface 110:25 236:15,21 161:16 165:19
231:8,17 233:6 180:12,15 181:18 113:5 surprise 112:3 184:13 213:1
234:2 182:10 184:4 sucker 155:9 surrounding talked 91:3 124:12
stop 7:22 12:21 199:18 205:12 sue 83:5 178:13 222:13,25 148:17 180:1,2,3
13:14 62:15 79:5 208:4,6 suffice 95:18 surveys 18:8,10 180:18 212:17
79:15 80:15 82:8 structures 14:1 suggest 157:5 19:1 221:22 225:16
87:12,17,21,21,21 16:8 26:14 96:23 suggested 136:2 SUTTON 3:11 talking 35:4 49:20
87:22 88:1 230:11 108:8 112:19 suggesting 65:4 132:15,21 133:3 54:17,18,21,22
stopping 53:15 127:16 151:7 150:18 189:22 134:22 148:24 63:15 65:6,7
story 197:24 172:7 183:8 222:5 236:21 swear 6:17 47:10 83:18 86:11 92:14
strata 102:16 226:1 suggests 113:14 sweat 213:22 98:9 104:25
195:17,17 196:21 struggle 149:20 182:4 switched 149:7 105:24,25 121:11
234:23 studied 191:21 Suite 213:21 switches 130:18 121:11,12 122:21
stratas 101:17 study 25:5,9 33:14 supervision 242:10 sworn 6:22 242:6 122:22,23 124:16
stratification 38:9 103:20 191:17 supplies 109:16 system 19:4 24:16 129:16 131:4
75:8 91:4 92:2,3,7 stuff 31:18 87:4 support 24:8 29:10 178:15,19 179:24 133:11 138:11
93:1 94:23 97:14 91:4 107:5 108:3 51:3 185:2 209:14 140:15 142:20
97:20 100:13,20 116:13 142:17 supported 149:14 144:7 146:23
100:25 141:5,15 176:12 217:9 150:13 T 151:20 171:23
141:16,20,21,24 229:15 suppose 235:23 T 4:1,6 5:1,1 187:9,9 205:10,12
142:12 145:16,20 subcontractor supposed 18:17 table 31:8 77:4 213:2 217:12,13
151:4 113:25 117:10 42:4,20 105:15 87:5 182:15 219:4 220:17,25
stratifications subcontractor's 109:19 111:3,15 take 15:6 30:1 31:9 234:25 235:15
94:15 118:5 148:9,9,10 38:15 40:22 42:18 talks 39:9 127:18
stratigraphy 74:24 subgrade 178:12 sure 10:23 15:22 53:18 56:19 58:2 176:25 177:13
75:7,11 178:16 21:5 23:25 30:24 58:3 61:4,11 228:15
stratum 72:22,25 subject 18:18 31:12 42:8 47:12 54:10 80:20 85:15 93:9 tamped 222:24
73:3 97:12 64:6 68:5,8 96:23 55:6 83:7 90:12 95:15,19 115:7 task 28:5 80:7
street 2:7 33:7 99:19 190:20 95:20 96:2,14 116:18 139:13,15 109:25 111:6
195:5,11,14,22 195:10 199:22 98:2 105:1 115:21 143:5 147:22 112:15 164:9,16
233:1,1,3 subjects 105:4 116:16 121:15 155:8 175:22 164:18,25 167:7
strength 196:7 submit 118:2 165:3 122:20 123:5 177:25 182:21 181:10 224:6
strictly 29:23 38:4 submittal 90:12,22 124:4 132:4 185:23 197:20 225:22,23
226:12 91:25 110:11 152:19 156:6 204:22 216:1 team 50:10

Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285


GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 267

technical 109:17 testimony 173:8 114:14 115:4 tide 232:23 233:2 216:13 226:17
169:14 208:19 241:4,6 119:2 120:7 233:20 235:18,25 tolerable 97:8
tell 7:25 21:13,17 testing 173:6 230:2 128:16 139:24 236:1,9,17,18 tool 52:6
25:12 35:3 38:6 tests 194:1,13 156:22 157:2 237:7 238:3,5 tools 51:5,8,11,12
47:11 50:1 57:22 text 175:16,20 165:13 199:14 tied 23:15 231:25 top 9:6 20:5,14
58:18 62:21 86:22 221:12 think 10:8,20 14:15 ties 153:11 33:23 38:1 41:18
91:5,17 102:23 textbook 176:23 15:8,23,25 33:10 timber 172:25 48:23 49:1 72:22
103:21 105:16 texts 175:20 33:19 34:6 40:12 173:5 73:3 97:12 143:3
121:2 132:16 Thank 6:16 19:23 40:21 41:19 48:24 time 5:13 7:10,10 144:1 152:16
138:2 139:3,11,12 23:13 24:6 38:15 53:21 56:24 60:20 8:5,16,17 10:9 155:2 175:21
148:10,10 152:12 60:22 78:1 109:1 74:3 80:18 85:20 12:24 13:1,3 23:5 176:15 177:23
163:18 167:19 122:8 139:5 88:16 93:1 98:10 23:11,20 24:18,21 185:12 196:19
194:16 213:18 143:16 151:1 98:11 118:12 24:25 26:12 27:24 206:8
216:14 232:9 174:20 179:25 132:5 133:12 30:2 83:15 120:15 topic 18:22,24 65:5
238:9 197:11 213:4 142:11 147:23 134:25 138:23 65:12,18,20
telling 86:19 92:6 Thanks 15:12 48:3 154:3,6,9 169:22 139:13 170:20 topics 6:13 27:7
93:2 99:5 137:8 224:24 170:15 171:22 177:5,6 215:10 64:1,16,22 65:2
142:3,24 143:17 theoretically 172:19 179:14 218:23 223:22 68:12,18 189:11
158:21 167:12 201:18 181:9 190:14 228:16,24 232:3 189:13
213:23 234:18 theory 181:21 208:21 211:24 238:4 239:3 tops 173:1
237:12 238:14 182:17,20,25 218:1 220:21 times 8:10 60:1 TORTS 2:13
tells 138:20 145:17 235:24 236:2 221:2 226:20,25 83:14 140:16 tortuous 102:7
158:19 239:9 229:8 216:2 232:1 187:20 188:14,21
temp 197:22 thereabouts 144:4 thinking 121:2 tip 9:6 16:24 17:4,6 total 176:1
template 201:16 thereof 5:14 thinks 53:24 17:8 20:2 22:20 totally 30:4 79:20
temporary 160:24 thick 176:2,5 third 170:20 23:10 33:24 37:18 165:18
ten 102:15 203:1,3 thickness 97:10 thought 12:1 19:9 37:21 38:18 39:1 tower 113:16
204:6,6 106:24 140:18,19 144:21 39:2,6,7 41:2 toxins 108:11
tenants 113:11 thin 73:3 167:5 208:4 99:13 104:12 tract 199:9
Tendering 15:22 thing 30:4 47:6 thousand 143:12 149:24 150:24 trained 176:20
52:13 56:9 110:17 70:17 75:19 80:12 144:4 157:9 186:23 training 176:21
115:8 149:21 103:5 115:1 three 58:1 83:14 187:14 188:14,17 transcribed 242:10
157:9 171:9 197:5 116:21 122:19 95:3 143:12 144:4 196:11,21 230:8,9 transcript 5:9
198:16 128:15 131:20 176:1 177:15 231:7 233:23 transcription 241:5
TERC 105:8 135:17,21 136:14 209:6,17,22 223:9 tired 65:4 140:12 242:11
109:25 220:25 140:19 143:20,22 three-eighths 176:4 title 31:3 152:7 transferred 25:7
term 16:16 155:16 156:21 three-foot 217:13 today 6:7 16:24 transition 189:17
terms 122:19 158:14 174:24 219:3 90:17 103:21 189:20 190:16
terrain 222:13,25 178:24 179:1 three-legged 147:8 192:24
test 44:9 95:1 180:16 200:6,17 113:16 TODD 3:23 translation 195:21
176:13 192:16 206:2 209:17,17 threshold 180:21 told 8:22 17:18 transmit 107:2
194:15,18,22 211:16 214:13 180:24 181:4,5 19:10 42:17 49:10 163:3,5 164:13
215:12 222:10 throw 87:4 59:14,19 69:2 transmittal 125:8
testified 6:23 48:13 things 43:21 52:7 thumb 53:11 76:9 88:11,25 126:23,23 129:16
testify 90:17 242:6 58:19 62:1 79:24 158:20 118:21 119:2 134:15 161:11
242:7 80:3 86:8 99:21 tidal 237:10 164:7 167:6 transmitted 126:5

Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285


GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 268

126:8,9 162:24 198:23 225:13 180:20 181:21 unique 52:7 versus 75:12 146:4
163:1 167:17 238:8 182:24 197:8 United 1:1,10,11 201:2
215:18 twenty 204:7,13 200:18 230:21 2:11,12 88:7 vertical 97:16
travel 101:22 twenty-five 209:6 uncontrolled 97:2 90:18 140:23 221:18 222:1
159:11 239:22 twice 8:13 87:6 101:6 141:1 vibrating 176:8
240:3 two 8:9,17 26:13 undergoing 199:11 universally 221:9 vibration 180:20
treated 113:19 83:14 119:9 underlays 157:8 unknown 113:5,12 181:4,5
131:6 136:12 130:17,21 131:8 underlies 73:1 updated 161:5 vibrations 67:6
Treeby 3:10 11:23 131:16 135:6 undermine 69:11 uplift 97:3 101:7 vibrator 180:3,5
12:7,11,15,25 141:14 151:16 underneath 135:22 USACE 6:20 39:13 vibratory 173:4
13:4,11,16 30:13 158:8 177:14 180:22 188:8 72:17 96:21 176:7
30:19,23 45:6 199:14 205:20 196:21 230:8 117:17 171:16 vicinity 15:17,19
82:16 109:8 214:3,6 231:7 233:23 191:18 58:10 61:3 69:24
121:23 122:3,7 twofold 206:15 235:4,5 239:23 use 38:12 51:5,8 71:8 156:9 179:16
131:9 133:14 type 47:14 80:11 underseepage 52:20,21 55:13 Vicksburg 168:24
134:16 149:2 107:5,6 108:3 25:10 34:3,10 58:25 61:19,20 169:4,6,7 198:15
153:21 156:2 128:15 158:16,19 36:9 41:24 66:24 71:14 128:8,10,11 VIDEOGRAPH...
162:2,6,10 170:13 158:21 178:15,17 66:25 67:2,22,23 128:19 142:18 3:22
170:21,25 201:20 178:19 179:13 69:10 72:19,24 157:2 163:4,14 view 175:17 186:7
204:24 211:12,18 195:15 215:2,12 96:24 97:16 99:20 179:13 180:5 187:21 189:25
211:23 219:5 types 75:12 98:25 100:12,15 104:1 215:12 224:11 190:1,2 191:8,25
224:23 233:15,24 128:7 186:16 187:7,9,18 uses 169:12 violate 42:9 78:2
240:6,11 187:22 188:4,10 usually 29:18 50:7 119:15 120:5,23
tremendous 104:3 U 192:23 196:1,17 97:9 165:16
trial 7:13 U 5:1 196:20 utilize 163:18 violates 56:5
trouble 188:2 Uh-huh 39:5 67:8 understand 7:17 209:13 virtue 111:3
TRS 160:23 105:1 123:11 7:24 8:3 19:15 utilized 70:24 visit 59:8,15
TRSs 176:11 160:14 161:15 26:22 42:2 43:6 162:21 visits 29:15,16
true 24:19 42:6 186:25 187:16 43:24 45:9 52:16 U.S 1:13 3:1 visualizing 239:13
69:12 79:5,8,10 188:15 202:23 60:13,25 64:5 239:15
79:11 128:9 230:3 204:8 207:1 65:15 66:5 68:14 V void 142:9 144:14
233:23 241:7 214:14 224:12 72:4,8 74:17 75:9 Vague 107:14 178:4
242:10 233:16 235:6,11 75:24 84:5 85:1,6 vaguely 184:22 voids 177:20 178:3
truth 47:11 242:6 um 8:21 9:10 15:21 85:6 86:13 99:15 Valley 198:20 volumes 184:12
try 35:24 36:1 18:13 25:4,22 107:15 128:5,6 value 42:18 113:24
84:21,22,23 26:11 28:5 32:19 150:8 159:7 values 97:8 W
134:25 143:6 47:9 49:7,12 166:18 192:12 varies 232:1 wait 54:14 77:9
trying 10:4,8 19:13 52:25 76:2 79:17 203:5,6,12 207:6 variety 128:6 82:2,2,3 91:21
27:20 29:5 35:22 100:13 104:23 229:1,23 218:17 92:5,5,12 124:24
35:23 36:2 41:8 118:3 125:23 understanding Various 213:15 139:13,22 169:7
49:21 76:11 78:23 126:4,24 128:10 12:1,6 30:2 37:7 Varuso 86:20 208:13
84:5,13 88:13 130:23 142:13 107:9 148:13 vary 97:17 waived 5:10
105:25 115:21 144:18 151:18 242:12 velocities 97:7 walk 77:8 78:3
119:5 140:22 155:3 157:12 undertake 148:11 verbiage 98:3 94:21 95:12 215:9
144:19 145:21 159:14 162:25 Underwater 188:2 wall 9:7,11,13,13
146:1,2 189:21,24 163:12 176:5 231:23 verify 53:9 94:19 9:14 15:17 17:4

Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285


GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 269

20:8,13 21:15 191:1 206:7,16,17 233:21 west 155:4 207:11 136:5 146:11
36:19 39:4 50:20 212:3 227:23 water-bearing 207:12 147:4 148:21
53:25 54:15,18,20 231:1 234:23 western 207:3 149:9,10 159:17
54:24,25,25 55:1 wanted 18:11 32:17 way 8:22 11:6 210:7,16 161:10 162:16
55:8,11,15,17,17 51:14 60:21 12:17 21:20 29:9 wet 178:16 179:11 163:18 171:6
56:18 60:1,9 112:22 129:4 35:18,20 43:8 wetter 215:5 172:24 177:12
61:14,22,24,25 199:17 47:4 53:7 75:6 we'll 7:22 14:9 15:4 178:6,8 228:14
70:14 72:2 74:7 wants 43:10 62:3 78:13 84:1 94:1 15:10 80:17 83:9 WGINT 117:16
74:23 91:13 92:13 85:21 205:18,19 101:13 104:9 84:3 85:15 96:18 173:6
93:11,17 94:7 206:2,2 207:17 106:11 130:25 191:9 212:2 white 174:14
95:4,5,13,15,20 209:11 135:13 142:6,14 we're 9:15 38:4 203:10
95:20,25 97:3 Ward 43:11 194:23 148:14 152:22 40:10 49:15,20 wide 204:5 209:7
99:22 101:7,14,15 195:24 238:16 166:4 180:9 54:13,17,18,21 213:7
101:19 102:13 washing 217:7 196:17 198:23 60:5 73:25 80:16 width 204:19
119:3 121:3,8 Washington 2:18 201:19 202:21 81:12 83:18 88:2 WILLIAM 3:10
122:22,24 123:12 26:18 107:25 204:18 205:7,13 92:14 93:25 willing 106:16
147:24 156:19 129:19 150:7 211:3 217:10 104:24 140:15 Wink's 197:20
160:15 173:23 162:22 164:5 235:22,22 236:8 141:22 142:2,24 withdraw 140:6
181:1 184:3 188:4 wasn't 32:13 49:11 239:11 242:15 143:2,3 146:4,23 withdrew 140:9
188:7,8,10,18 79:4,12 90:3 ways 119:9 126:5 151:24 152:19 witness 5:4,25 6:18
191:21 194:20 153:18 199:19 164:8 228:19 177:12 183:1,2 6:21 12:19 13:7
195:12 196:9 water 38:1 41:3,18 230:5 187:8,9 188:3 15:1 18:7,16
201:9,11,17 62:8,16 66:9,10 weak 178:14 205:10,12 207:22 19:18 27:4,6,16
206:18 210:4,7 71:19 74:2 75:16 195:16,20 208:13 213:1 30:15,25 31:2
212:18 213:2 79:1,16 96:22 weakened 187:3 215:4,17 219:3 32:22 35:3 43:23
223:12 230:11 97:2 100:15 101:2 website 30:18,22 we've 13:21 24:3 46:22 57:14 58:17
238:25 101:6,11,22,23,24 154:19 27:7 46:21 47:16 64:4,9,19 78:11
walls 54:8,9,12 102:6 106:8 107:2 wedding 114:8,16 59:25 75:15 77:3 78:14 82:8,18,22
74:13 98:11,23,24 137:10 140:21 135:21 137:16 77:6 82:2,4,25 102:22 108:22
118:25 149:16 150:20,23 140:15 88:16 100:8 114:4 125:19 131:25
wall's 144:17 159:11 160:8 week 85:22 86:8 124:12 140:16 138:11 151:14
want 12:21,23 13:9 184:2 185:12 197:21 141:21 144:7 152:3 155:19
14:17 15:5 19:6 187:19 188:4,6,19 weeks 8:9 62:8 182:11 205:15 156:4 166:1
19:15 32:14 33:16 203:17 205:8 weigh 38:12 212:17 220:17 183:13 189:3
35:14,21 43:24 214:22 216:20 weighing 38:5 234:19 190:8,25 191:9
44:16 49:19 54:7 223:4 231:5 232:3 weight 177:11,25 WGI 27:24 108:6 201:23 206:11
58:5 60:12 65:14 232:12,15,17 Weighted 39:15 108:11 109:12,18 231:10 240:16
68:14 83:5 85:1 233:4,20,22 235:9 40:24 96:8,12,13 109:24 110:16 241:1 242:5
85:15 95:16,22 235:21 236:7,9,9 went 9:4 126:13,22 113:25 114:12 wondering 37:20
96:2 105:22 106:5 236:16,17,18,21 144:21 145:1 129:18 130:7,9 230:4
106:12 119:16 237:13 238:3,5,16 148:7 153:16 131:19,19,21 wood 113:19
122:20 129:8 239:1,3,13,15,17 176:10 185:12 133:2 134:12 136:12
130:25 133:21 239:19,21,22 186:22 212:8 135:2,4,5,7,7,8,8 Woody 182:1
134:1 139:13,14 240:3 219:9,14 220:5 135:8,9,9,10,10 word 49:22 56:20
160:6 162:5 waterline 221:16 226:18 135:11,11,12,12 75:6 102:20
184:13 189:14 water's 79:14 weren't 114:14 135:12,12,14 158:11

Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285


GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 270

words 89:23 115:20 150:2,5 152:16 153:6 200:4 218:3 20 157:8 168:13
122:24 180:13 wrong 37:17 42:17 232:1,17 235:19 12-inch 214:20 172:10 222:14
221:19 42:21 67:17 83:8 237:10,11 215:7 216:18 2000 72:17 219:15
work 14:7 26:17 137:1 138:2 139:3 0+00S 21:13 13 4:21 197:1,12 2001 134:14
27:17,25 28:4 150:14 0+67S 21:13 217:21 218:3 2002 25:15
32:3 47:14 48:9 wrote 193:18 00 20:23 224:22 20044 2:18
48:20 49:5 58:9 007252 197:4 133 4:18 2008 1:16 241:25
59:16 60:7,12,15 X 007277 197:3 14 4:22 23:3 198:5 202-616-4289 2:19
60:17,18 61:2,4,7 X 4:1,1,6,6 007279 202:14 198:8 205:2 218:3 21 34:6
61:11,13 62:3,4 02 25:22 219:2 220:15 212862 130:10
62:14,16 68:22 Y 03 25:23 148 4:19 132:20
69:3,3,5,24 70:4,8 yards 233:4 037475 135:5 15 4:23 121:7 212866 132:20
70:9,9,22 71:12 yeah 10:23 59:25 05-4182 1:5 212:16 213:7 218 4:23
79:5,15 99:11 72:11 81:2 98:16 057606 131:21 218:8,20 219:1 22 21:25 22:13 41:3
107:4,10,25 108:5 100:23 109:12 057615 131:21 220:12,15 41:19
110:24 111:9 116:8 129:20,20 06-2268 1:8 151 4:20 228430 135:4
112:14 114:1,10 132:11 134:20 07 24:10 16 22:12 41:2,14,16 229272 135:11
115:23 117:11 136:4 142:5 07254 204:23 41:17 135:9 23 38:2
128:12 146:12 144:23 145:8 076654 162:16 200:25 213:12 23-foot 38:3
147:5 148:14 152:4 154:9 16+08 22:6 234 4:24
152:22 163:19 157:10 164:23 1 16-foot 200:12 24-inch 215:7
169:2 170:8 170:19 174:9 1 4:9 11:9,10 114:1 208:2 210:15 25 73:14 74:19
171:13,15 227:11 184:13 185:15 212:15 221:18,20 217:14 117:16,20 118:10
228:6 201:14 217:23 222:1 224:11,13 17 4:24 135:9 135:7 136:13
worked 25:13 218:24 220:14 225:6 234:15,16 144:19,22,25
works 169:23 223:21 230:2 1+57 22:19 17th 195:5,11,14 145:6,11 149:15
220:21 232:18 234:5 1-1/2 224:11 195:21 196:2 149:18 150:14
worried 142:22 236:11 10 4:18 133:4,5 233:1,2 168:12 200:22
217:3,5 year 10:11 25:21 134:9,14 149:4,4 18015 135:9 25-foot 104:21
worry 75:21 146:4 233:4 157:7 159:16 19.75 159:18,25 124:25 125:1
213:11 years 24:18 148:18 162:13,15 1969 10:21 23:11 188:13 213:7
worst 39:2 123:15 yellow 17:10 10/15/01 171:17 23:20 191:21 253 197:4 218:12
wouldn't 74:3 Yep 234:24 100 213:20 215:16 192:2,5 254 197:4 214:17
125:21 216:14 y'all 103:6 143:8 100-pound 215:22 197 4:21 218:12
219:24 224:13 109 4:14 1970 23:3 2544393 135:8
Z 11 4:9,10,11,19
write 137:19 198 4:22 255 197:4 214:16
Z 175:17 133:1 148:20,22
139:16,23 1986 192:17 218:13
zone 182:9 149:1,4
writing 61:8,16 1989 52:17 96:21 26 14:20 110:1
zones 97:10 106:24 110 4:15
91:21 181:8 1999 25:13 224:6
107:1,3 1110-2-1913 72:16
198:24 229:19 260 223:11,14
writings 148:2 1110-2-2502 96:20 2 262218 228:14
#
written 49:4,11 115 4:16,17 2 4:10 11:15,16 27 6:14 18:6 134:14
#75005 1:25 242:25
51:18,19 54:2 12 4:20 148:25 21:12 33:13 134:17 135:1
55:22,24 57:7 0 151:10,11 154:23 153:24 154:1 27th 1:16 241:25
59:10,12 60:14,19 0 22:19,22 38:3 161:3 178:22 212:16 216:20 2701 33:7
60:24 70:7 123:22 179:22 198:1 235:15 278 197:3

Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285


GRIESHABER, Ph.D., JOHN
6/27/2008
Page 271

279 197:3 140:20 160:7 51656 149:10 7400 1:15 3:4 6:20
28 6:14 44:3,5,7,13 207:14 208:3,6 51682 135:10 76 135:5,10
154:23,24 155:16 31 6:14 105:6 52123 134:25 76330 135:12
29 154:24 32-acre 199:9 52124 178:8 76654 161:10
29-99-D-0022 33:2 34 6:14 52125 172:24 76655 135:2
2980 223:16 343375 135:10 52127 134:20 76657 135:14 171:6
35 113:20 136:13 54 135:3 76659 135:12
3 136:15 142:3 54419 110:16 76660 135:12
3 4:11 11:20,21 35-foot 141:10 54420 113:2 136:5
13:21 20:16 24:4 143:19 54433 110:17 8
39:16 41:1 100:9 36 21:24 34:5,13 56 21:25 22:19,23 8 4:16 21:7 22:20
117:5 132:6 36:4 56789 109:12 99:13 115:7,11
154:17 156:8 36+50 20:23 57592 131:19 116:3 124:17
214:20,22 218:25 36+90 21:7,18 57601 130:7 131:20 130:6,13,15 131:3
219:1 221:18,25 36-foot 36:11 57606 130:7,16 131:15 143:19
222:1 223:7,15 36981 135:9 58 135:14 172:24 184:12
224:13 225:6 36984 133:2 134:12 8th 219:15
232:1,15 235:9,13 177:13 6 8.0 17:11,14
236:7 237:2,4,9 36985 135:10 6 4:5,14 20:21 21:5 800 152:17 153:17
237:10 37 6:14 109:5,6 117:7 154:3
3NGV 237:5 132:11 82 135:9
3s 221:20 4 60 33:19 84 135:8
3-foot 213:6 4 4:12 47:16,20 600 153:18 85 135:8
3-15 40:9 56:9 132:11 601 130:12 855 2:7
3-16 40:2 143:18 606 130:12 8583 135:8
3-17 40:2 40 142:24 143:22 614 130:17 888 2:16
3-3 40:9 144:16,16,18 615 130:18
3-7 38:16 410 173:3 630 135:13 9
3.1 113:3 43 135:11 6423 135:7 9 4:17 115:10,13
3:1 39:6 45 135:11 6454 135:7 130:9 132:17
30 20:22 21:23 46 135:11 65 37:18 90 20:25 152:16,17
24:18 73:15 47 4:12 135:11 69 23:3 214:20 215:11,20
113:20 136:12,15 48621 135:13 215:22,24 216:18
141:9 142:4,24 48626 159:17 7 90-pound 215:23
143:19 7 4:15 21:10,23 92 130:19
30(b)(6) 1:10 6:3 5 110:16,18 111:1 94 4:13
27:6,16 86:14,21 5 4:13 94:2,3 122:6 127:18 132:11
110:4 191:9 132:11 141:9 136:9 192:17
30+0-0 21:18 143:18 202:9 7+50 22:6
30+00 20:21 21:4 214:21 216:19 700 154:7
30-foot 145:11 5-foot 143:18 70113 2:8
300 42:19 43:11 50 157:18 70118 6:21
45:21 54:20 71:11 504-525-1335 2:9 70118-3651 1:16
71:16,24 74:21 504-862-2843 3:6 3:5
83:10,11,13,15 51585 148:21 71142 135:11
118:18 136:19 51611 149:10 7252 218:11 219:2

Johns Pendleton Court Reporters 800 562-1285